This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: duplicate test message style?
- From: mec dot gnu at mindspring dot com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain)
- To: cagney at gnu dot org, mec dot gnu at mindspring dot com
- Cc: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 23:23:33 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: duplicate test message style?
ac> PASS: gdb.base/sigbpt.exp: nopass SIGSEGV; stepi bp before segv
ac> PASS: gdb.base/sigbpt.exp: nopass SIGSEGV, stepi bp before segv
ac> PASS: gdb.base/sigbpt.exp: nopass SIGSEGV for stepi bp before segv
This rubs me the wrong way because it's a distinction that humans
would not make.
ac> PASS: gdb.base/sigbpt.exp: nopass SIGSEGV; stepi bp before segv
ac> PASS: gdb.base/sigbpt.exp: set breakpoint 0 of 1; stepi bp before segv
ac> PASS: gdb.base/sigbpt.exp: stepi out of handler; stepi bp before segv
ac> PASS: gdb.base/sigbpt.exp: clear breakpoint 0 of 1; stepi bp before segv
This is okay.
ac> PASS: gdb.base/sigbpt.exp: stepi bp before segv; nopass SIGSEGV
ac> PASS: gdb.base/sigbpt.exp: stepi bp before segv; set breakpoint 0 of 1
ac> PASS: gdb.base/sigbpt.exp: stepi bp before segv; stepi out of handler
ac> PASS: gdb.base/sigbpt.exp: stepi bp before segv; clear breakpoint 0 of 1
This is also okay.
So if you have a preference, between the two, pick the one you want.
I have a slight preference for the second form. Here's why. If I ever
notice the message, it's usually a context where I need to dig in and
and analyze it. I think it would be a little easier for me to search
off the "outer; inner" style rather than the "inner; outer style".
But both of them are pretty searchable so either is okay.
Michael C