This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: conformtest: Support xfail markers on individual assertions [committed]
- From: Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>
- To: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 13:17:45 -0700 (PDT)
- Subject: Re: conformtest: Support xfail markers on individual assertions [committed]
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1506192006270 dot 1466 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk>
I like the intent. I noticed that almost all of the instances in the -data
files use a consistent convention for the comment:
// Bug NNNNN: ...
My first impulse was to ask that the convention be stated somewhere and
followed uniformly. But it occurs to me it would be nice to have this be
more formal than a comment convention. How about instead of:
// Bug NNNNN: explanatory comment
xfail-foo ...
we make it:
// explanatory comment
xfail {NNNNN} foo ...
This makes it completely explicit that you can't have an XFAIL without
having a bug filed for it. It also makes it marginally easier than a
comment convention to have scripts that do something or other with the bug
number.
Thanks,
Roland