This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RFC: Additional testsuite alternative
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 03:50:07PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote:
>
> It's a pity to implement a little language in Tcl. People always
> introduce little languages, saying, "I just need a very simple
> language for this one situation; I don't need anything complex."
> And then, minor feature by minor feature, it grows, until you've got
> the Bourne shell.
>
> Doesn't the Tcl we're using nowadays have namespaces? Can't we make
> .x files just Tcl scripts that run in a namespace that has all the
> right commands in it? Then Daniel's example:
>
> #compile two.cc two.exe executable debug
> #runto main
> #test "ptype StrOne"
> type = class OneStruct {
> public:
> int simple;
> [synthetic OneStruct]}
> #test "ptype ConstStrOnePtr"
> type = const class OneStruct {
> public:
> int simple;
> [synthetic OneStruct]} \*
>
> could just be:
>
> compile two.cc two.exe executable debug
> runto main
> test "ptype StrOne" {
> type = class OneStruct {
> public:
> int simple;
> [synthetic OneStruct]}
> }
> test "ptype ConstStrOnePtr" {
> type = const class OneStruct {
> public:
> int simple;
> [synthetic OneStruct]} \*
> }
>
> And you've got all your quoting stuff, comments, substitution, etc for
> free. Designed carefully, not grown incrementally.
Now that's the kind of suggestion I was really fishing for. I'll
investigate further - I like it.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer