On Sat, Mar 15, 2025 at 11:02:59AM -0500, Robert Dubner wrote:
> I am struggling with the learning curves, here. I am trying to understand
> dejagnu, and I am trying to understand tcl, and I am trying to understand
> the testsuite chain of commands and files that result, somehow, in the
> programs in testsuite/cobol.dg being executed. Dealing with three new
> technologies is slowing me down considerably. I am looking for some help
> to leapfrog that.
>
> We have about 800 programs that definitively have no IP issues preventing
> their use in the GCC repository.
>
> But the vast bulk of them are based on capturing stdout and comparing that
> to a known-good file.
>
> I am completely prepared to create a test-0001.cob source code file for
> the repo. I can prepare a matching test-0001.expected-output file for the
> repo.
The normal dejagnu way is to use dg-output for that.
So, if you have test-0001.cob and test-0001.expected-output, you could do
for i in *.cob; do \
sed 's/\([].*()[]\)/\\\1/g;s/^/*> { dg-output {/;s/$/(\\n|\\r\\n|\\r)}
}/;$s/.\{12\}} }$/} }/' \
< $i.expected-output >> $i.cob; done
to turn the expected output into dg-output directives.
Maybe I've missed some characters that also need to be backslash prefixed, in
that case they'd go next to the .*() part early in the regexp.
Of course, if the output is huge, perhaps we should write some dg- directive
for specifying file with expected output and compare against that rather than
the dg-output directives.
But if it is just a couple dozens of lines, I think dg-output could be fine.
> I see the stdout from each executed program is captured in the cobol.log
> file. But it doesn't do me much good, there.
>
> Is there some way that the output of { dg-do run } can be directed to
> designated test-0001.stdout and test-0001.stderr files? If so, I can
> fairly easily add boilerplate to the end of the COBOL test program to do
> the comparison.
>
> Otherwise I am going to have start rewriting those hundreds of programs to
> somehow test themselves and produce the go/no-go response.
Jakub
