Hi Rainer
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 10:51:51AM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
> While reviewing the GCC testsuite, I noticed that practically every
> testsuite driver has the equivalent of
>
> load_lib ${tool}-dg.exp
>
> While ${tool}.exp is automatically loaded by the framework, this file
> needs to be loaded separately.
>
> It is sort of documented in dg.exp:
>
> # The normal way to write a testsuite is to have a .exp file containing:
> #
> # load_lib ${tool}-dg.exp
> # dg-init
> # dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/$subdir/foo*]] ...
> # dg-finish
>
> but so far I've no idea what the point is and how to decide what goes
> into ${tool}.exp and what into ${tool}-dg.exp. Unless there is a good
> reason for this separation, I plan to go over the GCC testsuites and
> remove the explicit load_lib and do that in the corresponding
> ${tool}.exp until both are merged.
I don't know. I think the best person to ask this question is Doug
Evan. Doug, can you remember? :-)
Ben
I can only guess, but I suspect the confusion here is because one needs to remember that "dg" is just one way to write a gcc dejagnu test.
Not every test uses dg, and when dg was added to the gcc testsuite I certainly wasn't going to load dg stuff in ${tool}.exp.
For reference sake,
I think a simple rule of thumb for ${tool}.exp vs ${tool}-dg.exp is if it's dg-specific put it in the latter.
But no matter,
I have no opinion on what one does today.