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)


>>>>> "Joel" == Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> writes:

>> Thus, my point is that we could replace those "send_gdb + sleep +
>> gdb_expect" sequences with just one gdb_test{,multiple,no_output}.  I
>> don't know yet if this transformation is possible for every test in
>> the completion.exp file.  Maybe the changes would be quite dramatical.
>> However, this test would be _much_ simpler and much faster.  Also, the
>> current formatting is ugly ;).
>> 
>> So, do you think this is a good idea?  Is there something I'm missing?

Joel> I don't know the history of the testcase, and this is only my own
Joel> opinion, but I tend to agree with you.   I think we should keep one
Joel> test with \t, to make sure that a tab does trigger the completion,
Joel> but the rest of the testcase should be using the "complete" command.
Joel> That's what we do at AdaCore anyways...

I tend to agree.  One concern I do have is that "complete" and TAB
completion aren't always equivalent.  There is a PR open about this
IIRC.  IIRC the issue is that one approach respects some kind of
completion limit and the other does not.  But, if this is tested, it
will presumably show up in the conversion.

Tom


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