On 22 February 2008 11:24, J.C. Pizarro wrote:
> Hallo,
>
> i'm comparing minor differences between testresults of 4.4/4.3 (20080221
> x64) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-02/msg01486.html
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-02/msg01487.html
> and i found superfluous reporting in 4.4.0:
>
> FAIL: foo/bar.mm (test for excess errors)
> UNRESOLVED: foo/bar.mm compilation failed to produce executable
>
> Why does it print FAIL and UNRESOLVED in 4.4, and only UNRESOLVED in 4.3?
Notice the difference between "test for excess errors" and "failed to
produce executable". They are two entirely different conditions being
reported.
> Don't report many errors for the same failed file!
> Do report only one kind of error well studied for each failed file!
No. A single testcase may test more than one part of the compiler at once.
That is why the log file *tells* you what went wrong: were there
bogus/unexpected warnings or errors, did or did not the test program compile,
if it did compile did it or did it not run. Each of these problems is easily
distinguishable in the log file, as lon gas you remember not to ignore the
text after the filename.
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....
