Re: [RFC]: Add test for verifying the fix to the SEGV error when printing F77 array element

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>]

On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 04:41:02PM +0800, Wu Zhou wrote:
> Daniel and all,
> 
> This is the testcase associated with the following patch:
> 
>    http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2005-06/msg00090.html	
> 
> Without the patch above, the last three tests fail. With the patch, all
> tests pass.  It is tested on ppc64 with g77-3.3.3 and g77-3.4.3.
> 
> It is my first attempt to add a new testcase into GDB testsuite. So if 
> there is any errors or missings, please feel free to tell me. Thanks a 
> lot!

Thanks.  It does need some changes, but not big ones.

I'd appreciated it if you could provide new files as diffs.  The normal
way to do this is by diffing them against /dev/null, with the
appropriate relative path to the new file.  That way, I can save your
message and apply it as a patch.

Let's use hyphens instead of underscores in file names; there's already
a lot of hyphenated test cases.  So array-element.exp.

> array_element.f
> ======================================

We're trying to add copyright notices to all new tests; please add one
here.

>         dimension a(10)
>         write(*,*)'This is a test.'
>         call sub(a,10)
>         write(*,*) a
>         stop
>         end
> 
>         subroutine sub(a,n)
>         dimension a(n)
>         do 100 i=1, n 
>           a(i)=i
> 100     continue
>         return
>         end
> 


> array_element.exp
> =====================================

> if $tracelevel then {
> 	strace $tracelevel
> }
> 
> #
> # test running programs
> #
> set prms_id 0
> set bug_id 0

This bit is not necessary.

> set testfile "array_element"
> set srcfile ${testfile}.f
> set binfile ${objdir}/${subdir}/${testfile}
> 
> if  { [gdb_compile "${srcdir}/${subdir}/${srcfile}" "${binfile}" executable {debug f77}] != "" } {
>     gdb_suppress_entire_file "Testcase compile failed, so all tests in this file will automatically fail."
> }

Please don't use gdb_suppress_entire_file; use "untested" and then
"return".  See the Java tests for an example.  You can see what will
happen when no Fortran compiler is installed by running
"runtest array-element.exp F77_FOR_TARGET=false"; compare with
"runtest jprint.exp GCJ_UNDER_TEST=false".

You can get the right result by also adding "quiet" to the last
argument of gdb_compile, and using untested/return.

> if [get_compiler_info ${binfile} "f77"] {
>     return -1
> }

What's this needed for?  Also, get_compiler_info does not take a second
argument.

> gdb_exit
> gdb_start
> gdb_reinitialize_dir $srcdir/$subdir
> gdb_load ${binfile}
> 
> if ![runto sub_] then {
>     perror "couldn't run to breakpoint"
>     continue
> }
> 
> set bp_location [gdb_get_line_number "continue"]
> gdb_test "break $bp_location" \
>     "Breakpoint.*at.* file .*$srcfile, line $bp_location\\." \
>     "brealpoint at continue"

Typo there.

> gdb_test "continue" \
>     "Continuing\\..*Breakpoint.*" \
>     "continue to breakpoint"
> gdb_test "print a(1)" "= 1.*" "print the first element of array a"
> 
> gdb_test "continue" \
>     "Continuing\\..*Breakpoint.*" \
>     "continue to breakpoint once again"
> gdb_test "print a(2)" "= 2.*" "print the first element of array a"

> gdb_exit
> return 0

This bit isn't actually necessary.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC