On 07/27/2017 01:52 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 11:25 PM, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: >> On Jul 26, 2017, at 9:00 AM, Pierre-Marie de Rodat <dero...@adacore.com> >> wrote: >>> At the last GNU Cauldron, Richard Biener and I talked about DWARF output >>> testing. Except for guality tests, which are disabled on several >>> targets, the only way tests check the DWARF is scanning the annotated >>> assembly (-dA), making it hard to write reliable tests. >> >>> Anyway, Richard and I discussed about doing something similar in-tree, >>> and here is a candidate set of patches to achieve that >> >> I'm fine with the direction if a reviewer wants to go in that direction. I >> wish python didn't have a built-in speed penalty, that's the only downside I >> don't like about it. Aside from that, even switching all of the testsuite >> to be python based isn't a terrible idea. > > But is it worse than TCL? I don't think Python is worse than TCL. Few things would have that property. And I think we're a lot more likely to be able to find folks that can hack Python as needed vs hacking TCL.
jeff