On 10/29/2015 08:21 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
Excellent point. I think this is worth some serious thought. Given the
state of GCC's sources, tests of this nature are going to be inherently
tied to implementation details/sources rather than interfaces. That's
obviously not ideal, but it is where we are. Combined with the
cleanups/refactoring I think we ought to be doing, we've got a fairly
strong argument to set these along side the sources.
The counter is that when grepping, you should probably be using
find/xargs grep :-)
There's actually a tool called ack which automates that. But we've often
seen cases where people fail to spot occurrences in config/ directories.
I think tests for things like bitmap or wide-int could well live at the
end of the respective source files - this would be the most convenient
location so that if you add a new bitmap function, you can immediately
add tests as well.
Do we even support plugins on every host?
The tests you have so far are focused mostly on high-level gimple/tree
tests where this limitation is probably not showing up very much, but I
think it would be better to have something that allows us to have more
in-depth tests.
Yes. But I think this level of testing is on another point in the
testing continuum and will probably require some significant work beyond
the unit testing being proposed by David.
Not sure about significant - it shouldn't take long to set up an extra
test-gcc build at the top-level if we decide to go with that and add a
-ftest option. I think it's worth spending some time thinking long-term
about what the best way to go about this would be.
Bernd
