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.