This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [rfc] xfailed tests in gdb.c++/classes.exp
- From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec at shout dot net>
- To: drow at mvista dot com, gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 23:01:50 -0600
- Subject: Re: [rfc] xfailed tests in gdb.c++/classes.exp
> Sure. But I suspect 2) represents an actual bug. Fixing this is about
> three lines in c-typeprint.c. Should we or shouldn't we?
A little late night rambling ...
It depends on your role.
In the QA role I've got kind of a black-boxy view. If the test script
mimics what a user would type, and if I think that most users would be
happy, then I'm happy.
In the developer role, any loose edge might be a symptom of a bug. I
remember when one little test in selftest.exp did not pass and I traced
it down to memory corruption inside gdb. And we all know that a stitch
in time saves nine. If you're looking at results that don't match what
you, as a developer, believe the code should do, that is noteworthy,
even if Joe User has no issue with it.
Also, gdb has thousands more problems than we can fix. We have to do
brutal triage on our TODO lists, every day. And I am personally bad at
prioritizing. In fact one of my motives for working on gdb is to
practice better prioritizing in an environment that lets me set my own