On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:34:17AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Mar 29, 2016, at 7:45 AM, David Edelsohn <dje....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > We have no plans to make code generation a slave to the testsuite.
> > The testsuite is a tool, successful results from the testsuite is not
> > a goal unto itself.
> >
> > This patch is okay.
>
> We look forward to the day when someone can find the time and energy and
> desire to make subsets of this work better and reenable those as they
> bring them back online. I view it as I do for turning off C++ testing on
> a PIC target, if no one wants to make it work nicely, then it is better to
> just turn it off. Anyone with the desire to make these tests work nicely
> will step forward and donate as they are able to. If someone would like
> that work done, you can edit up a TODO or projects file to describe the
> work you’d like done, and try and find someone that would like to do the
> work, or, just do the work yourself. If someone has the free time, and
> wants to tackle this project, merely step forward and let others know.
> This is how we make progress.
The problem with the disabling is not in those tests that don't pass right
now on whatever target you are testing on, but with any regressions in tests
that pass right now but will not pass in half a year or year because of GCC
changes; if the tests are disabled, nobody will notice that, one can't look
at gcc-regressions or elsewhere to find out quickly where it regressed, etc.
Jakub
