On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 02:11:13PM +0400, Andrey Belevantsev wrote:
> >Testcase is very small. Why not add it?
>
> Frankly, I think that the chances of this test uncovering similar
> issues in the future are very small. It needs lots of options to
> make it trigger and even with this a specific revision. The chance
> of triggering the asserts I added on another code is much higher.
> In the past, I have also avoided to add tests that require 5+
> options to trigger the issue, adding only those that have some hope
> on more ore less reliably reproducing the required issue. The best
> solution of course is having an infrastructure to test the specific
> scheduler decisions, which we don't have.
>
> You are welcome to add the test if you feel so strongly about us needing it.
I guess it depends, if you e.g. have a small runtime testcase, it might be
useful to add it, while it is unlikely it will trigger the same issue, it
could trigger a different issue in another part of the compiler, especially
if the testcase is a combination of e.g. several more rarely used features.
But for a ICE testcase with many weird options to trigger it I agree it
sometimes doesn't make sense to add the testcase, especially if it already
doesn't trigger on the trunk as in this case.
Jakub
