-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 According to Eric Blake on 7/13/2009 6:17 AM: > According to Paolo Bonzini on 7/12/2009 5:09 AM: >> These are lightweight versions of AT_CHECK that automatically >> add the equivalent of ! in front of the command and change a >> failure exit status to 77 resp. 99. They expand to just >> two lines of shell code at the expense of not supporting >> tracing (but then so does AT_XFAIL_IF). > > I like the idea. But there were enough nits, so let's see a revised patch > before you push anything.
Also, the current semantics of AT_XFAIL_IF are that all conditions are collected up front, and then run before any of the group even if they were written after the tests. I like the semantics of these two macros better (tests run prior to this point are run as-is, so you can rely on a 'skipped' test meaning that everything before the skip is still good). Part of me thinks it might be nice to change AT_XFAIL_IF to use similar semantics, but then the other part worries about backwards compatibility if we change it now (in other words, would delaying when AT_XFAIL_IF conditions are tested lead to any potential failures in existing clients of AT_XFAIL_IF, where the test no longer reports a proper XFAIL?). Thoughts? - -- Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well! Eric Blake [email protected] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin) Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkpbJ0MACgkQ84KuGfSFAYDAkgCdETVn82LYSAnftkqxEyfnev+t fNAAnjB1A8RKopNPw7k50oEe6h9xEr42 =3+AF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
