This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: RFC: gdb.c++/main-falloff.exp (a new KFAIL)

On Mon, 30 Dec 2002 10:46:41 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz <> said:

> Secondly, I really dislike this form.  Adding gdb_expect's all over is
> bad, because gdb_test has a much more thorough list of things to expect
> indicating various errors.  Better would be to solve this problem with
> a little TCL.  What do you think of:
>   gdb_test_multiple "info locals" \
> 	{pass "(i|j|k) = (101|102|103)\r\n(i|j|k) = (101|102|103)\r\n(i|j|k) = (101|102|103)"
> 	 kfail "gdb/900" "No locals."} \
> 	"testing locals"

Something like this seems reasonable to me.  It would be nice if the
branches could execute arbitrary code, like gdb_expect does, though,
so that the xfails/kfails could be conditional on the operating
system, debug format, or whatever.  Though I do like the fact that
your version means that you only have to type the message once for all
branches (and presumably the message would be optional if the message
is the same as the command).

David Carlton

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]