This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org 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] Fixing gdb.base/completion.exp (PR testsuite/12649)


My 2 cents...

> The "\t" method of completion interacts with readline, the
> "complete command" method doesn't.  I think it's useful and
> important to test the "\t" version, especially since it's
> what CLI users are using.

I agree. But at the same time, do we need to only test completion
using this approach only (I initially suggested that we keep 1 test
that uses this approach, and do the rest with gdb_test "complete ...")?
Incidentally, the same argument can be made for testing the "complete"
command as well, as this is what IDEs use.

So, perhaps one possible evolution of the testcase is to write a
procedure that verifies both forms of completion...

-- 
Joel


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