On Feb 27, 2023, at 9:59 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson <h...@axis.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net>
>> Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 09:41:18 -0800
>
>>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/lib/multiline.exp
>>> b/gcc/testsuite/lib/multiline.exp
>>> index 84ba9216642e..5eccf2bbebc1 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/multiline.exp
>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/multiline.exp
>>
>>> - ${maybe_x}pass "$title was found: \"$escaped_regex\""
>>> + ${maybe_x}pass "$title was found"
>>> } else {
>>> - ${maybe_x}fail "$title not found: \"$escaped_regex\""
>>> + ${maybe_x}fail "$title not found"
>>
>> Side remark:
>>
>> So, the string on pass and the string on fail are supposed
>> to be exactly the same. Regression analysis works only if
>> the string is the same. "regexp test", might be
>> suggestive enough and can be the same spelling for both.
>
> Right. Should I changed it now?
Sure. Not required, but would be nice.
> (Pro: see above. Con: again meddling with regression-test history.)
Only new tests that don't have any polish do this sort of thing. :-)
> Like (editing on the fly here) as the "found" part seems
> redundant:
>
>>> - ${maybe_x}pass "$title was found"
>>> + ${maybe_x}pass "$title"
>>> } else {
>>> - ${maybe_x}fail "$title not found"
>>> + ${maybe_x}fail "$title"
Yes, same difference. Both strings should be identical.
Thanks.
