On 10/30/2025 3:52 AM, Jakub Wartak wrote:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 10:40 AM Bryan Green <[email protected]> wrote:
On 10/30/2025 3:37 AM, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
On 2025-Oct-30, Jakub Wartak wrote:
Hi Bryan, cfbot is red. I'm was fan of having those tests for this
(bring complexity and we didn't have tests for Linux backtrace
anyway), but now MINGW win32 is failing on those tests where the
feature is not present:
I hate to say this after the code is written, but I think we should not
put any tests in the first step. I predict that these are going to be
enormously brittle and that we'll waste a lot of time making them
stable. I think we should commit the Windows support for backtraces
first, then consider whether we actually want TAP tests for the overall
feature. We've gone several years with glibc backtrace support without
any tests -- why do we think the Windows implementation thereof _must_
necessarily have them?
It will not bother me to remove them. It was my first effort at writing
TAP tests, so it was a nice learning experience.
Well, that was a typo on my part (stupid me), I wanted to write: I was
NOT a fan of having those tests for this (in first place) - sorry for
confusion!
Anyway we have test because I think Michael and Euler triggered this
but earlier i've tried to persuade NOT to do this (see: `Also is it
worth it to test that setting backtrace_funciton=FOO really emits
.*FOO.* in log message cross-platform way?`), anyway Bryan implemented
this and it looks like v3 has just turned [gG]reen ;)
(https://cirrus-ci.com/build/6001832838823936)
-J.
The tests are easy enough to get rid of. I think Alvaro has a good idea
of committing the windows support for backtraces and then consider
whether we want TAP tests or not. I will make a v4 patch without the
TAP tests unless someone strongly objects.
The tests don't really test whether this code would be the cause of
cause of a problem, they mainly test whether you are getting the correct
output in your backtrace. If you have a pdb file, you should get
filenames and linenumbers in addition to addresses and symbols. If you
don't have a pdb file you will only get export function symbols and
addresses. So, even if you should have a pdb and don't...you still get
something useful.
Bryan Green
