Hi all, hi Thomas (2x), hi Sandra,
On 16.07.21 09:52, Thomas Koenig via Fortran wrote:
The part of the patch to add tests for this goes on top of my base
TS29113 testsuite patch, which hasn't been reviewed or committed yet.
It is my understanding that it is not gcc policy to add xfailed test
Hi all, hi Thomas (2x), hi Sandra,
On 16.07.21 09:52, Thomas Koenig via Fortran wrote:
The part of the patch to add tests for this goes on top of my base
TS29113 testsuite patch, which hasn't been reviewed or committed yet.
It is my understanding that it is not gcc policy to add xfailed test
On 16.07.21 20:22, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
So it seems to me rather surprising to take the position that we should
not be committing any new test cases that need to be XFAILed
It is what I was told in no uncertain terms some years ago, which
is where my current state of knowledge comes from.
On 16.07.21 20:22, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
So it seems to me rather surprising to take the position that we should
not be committing any new test cases that need to be XFAILed
It is what I was told in no uncertain terms some years ago, which
is where my current state of knowledge comes from.
On 7/16/21 9:32 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
[much snipped]
Of course, we shall assume a certain level of quality in the XFAILed test
cases: I'm certainly not suggesting we put any random junk into the
testsuite, coarsely XFAILed. (I have not reviewed Sandra's test cases to
that effect, but
On 7/16/21 9:32 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
[much snipped]
Of course, we shall assume a certain level of quality in the XFAILed test
cases: I'm certainly not suggesting we put any random junk into the
testsuite, coarsely XFAILed. (I have not reviewed Sandra's test cases to
that effect, but
On 7/16/21 9:32 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
[Also including for guidance.]
Hi!
(I'm not involved in or familiar with Sandra's Fortran TS29113 work, just
commenting generally here.)
On 2021-07-16T09:52:28+0200, Thomas Koenig via Gcc-patches
wrote:
It is my understanding that it is not gcc
On 7/16/21 9:32 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
[Also including for guidance.]
Hi!
(I'm not involved in or familiar with Sandra's Fortran TS29113 work, just
commenting generally here.)
On 2021-07-16T09:52:28+0200, Thomas Koenig via Gcc-patches
wrote:
It is my understanding that it is not gcc
[Also including for guidance.]
Hi!
(I'm not involved in or familiar with Sandra's Fortran TS29113 work, just
commenting generally here.)
On 2021-07-16T09:52:28+0200, Thomas Koenig via Gcc-patches
wrote:
> It is my understanding that it is not gcc policy to add xfailed test
> cases for
[Also including for guidance.]
Hi!
(I'm not involved in or familiar with Sandra's Fortran TS29113 work, just
commenting generally here.)
On 2021-07-16T09:52:28+0200, Thomas Koenig via Gcc-patches
wrote:
> It is my understanding that it is not gcc policy to add xfailed test
> cases for
10 matches
Mail list logo
