On 9/24/24 5:46 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
Thanks for the review!
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:10:27 -0700
Cc: Jerry D <jvdelis...@gmail.com>
From: Jerry D <jvdelis...@gmail.com>
On 9/23/24 11:21 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
I hope the inclusion of gfortran-dg.exp in
fortran-torture.exp is not controversial, but there's no
fortran-specific testsuite file common to dg and
classic-torture and also this placement is still in the
"Utility routines" section of gfortran-dg.exp. (BTW, the C
torture-tests changed to the dg framework some time ago - no
more .x-files there and dg-directives actually work - there
are some in gfortran.fortran-torture that are apparently
ignored!)
Explain this change of including gfortran-dg.exp in fortran-torture.exp.
I need to put the new proc in a file, to be used by both dg
and classic-torture. I picked among the untility-carrying
files gfortran-dg.exp, as it looked more fitting than
e.g. fortran-modules.exp. Since it's not previously
included there, I included that file in fortran-torture.exp.
By including that file, not just the new proc
gfortran-dg-rmunits but also the other procs in that file
are available. Since they don't collide with the
fortran-torture machinery, that should have no effect.
What does it mean in the case I do 'make -k -j4 check-fortran'? Does
gfortran-dg-exp get performed twice?
(I assume you mean "are the gfortran.dg tests run twice" as
other interpretations make less sense to me.)
Your interpretation of my typo is correct. Along with Andre I like auto
cleanup. On new test cases we try to have them self delete whether they
pass or fail.
So your changes are ok with me.
No.
Forgive my ignorance of the
testsuite incantations.
There's nothing but load_lib and proc definitions in
gfortran-dg.exp, specifically no "top-level code" running
tests like execute.exp or dg.exp, so including it should
have no such effect...but I see that the files it include
*do* have top-level code (setting global variables for use
by the testsuite machinery, *not* running tests).
Perhaps I should ignore that misnomer and put
gfortran-dg-rmunits in fortran-modules.exp in order to put
pollution worries to rest. After all, that file already has
the utility proc igrep, used in gfortran-dg-rmunits. So,
new version coming up.
brgds, H-P
