On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 09:24:28AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 05/03/2013 04:46 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
> >On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohn...@google.com> wrote:
> >>Yes it will ICE on failure. What is the guideline on c.torture vs gcc.dg?
> I don't think there's any general guidelines.
>
> c-torture was an older framework that was considerably less
> expressive in terms of control of flags, testing for specific
> messages, etc. But c-torture had the advantage that it iterates
> through a (predefined) list of options, testing each one
> individually while gcc.dg ran each test a single time.
>
> A many years ago parts of the older c-torture framework were
> revamped to utilize the gcc.dg framework *but* they kept the ability
> to run the tests with a variety of options.
>
> Based on my experience I tend to prefer the torture framework as it
> gives coverage across a wider variety of options and that's proven
> useful through the years. For this particular test the increase in
> coverage is marginal, hence my comment "No objection to it being in
> gcc.dg though".
Note that there is also gcc.dg/torture/ which also runs multiple options.
Jakub
