This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: PATCH: tests for MI commands
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: Nick Roberts <nickrob at snap dot net dot nz>
- Cc: Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2005 21:55:23 -0400
- Subject: Re: PATCH: tests for MI commands
- References: <20050727002721.GA27261@nevyn.them.org> <17126.62115.642102.742744@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050727035503.GA30670@nevyn.them.org> <17127.29797.456624.592127@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <200507272103.j6RL3HYf022581@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <17128.2540.73355.406922@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050728002057.GA25134@nevyn.them.org> <17128.14238.713213.954375@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050731221113.GC30901@nevyn.them.org> <17133.24533.145170.792002@farnswood.snap.net.nz>
On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 11:33:41AM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote:
> > Second, I get a value of 0 here, but the test still fails.
> > func_ptr_struct and func_ptr_ptr aren't initialized either. Chasing
> > uninitialized members is going to leave the tests script a bit of a
> > mess.
> >
> > Initializing the whole structure proved to be a bit of a pain - these
> > tests are ridiculously tricky to edit. But here it is. Tested on
> > i686-pc-linux-gnu and committed. I hope this will be more useful if we
> > add any additional value-related tests.
>
> I find the number of backslashes needed confusing (because of the read syntax
> for strings?). Your changes seem concise. I'll test these too.
>
> Thanks again.
No problem. About the backslashes:
If you say "\\\\" in TCL, then the parser will reduce it to the literal
string <\\>. Then the regular expression parser will collapse that
down to a pattern which matches <\>. {\\} is the same as "\\\\"
because backslashes aren't special to TCL inside of braces.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC