Hi François,
> On 11 Oct 2023, at 05:49, François Dumont <frs.dum...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/10/2023 15:59, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>>> On 23 Sep 2023, at 21:10, François Dumont <frs.dum...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm eventually fixing those tests the same way we manage this problem in
>>> libstdc++ testsuite.
>>>
>>> testsuite: Add optional libstdc++ version namespace in expected
>>> diagnostic
>>>
>>> When libstdc++ is build with --enable-symvers=gnu-versioned-namespace
>>> diagnostics are
>>> showing this namespace, currently __8.
>>>
>>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>>
>>> * testsuite/g++.dg/coroutines/coro-bad-alloc-00-bad-op-new.C:
>>> Add optional
>>> '__8' version namespace in expected diagnostic.
>>> * testsuite/g++.dg/coroutines/coro-bad-alloc-01-bad-op-del.C:
>>> Likewise.
>>> * testsuite/g++.dg/coroutines/coro-bad-alloc-02-no-op-new-nt.C:
>>> Likewise.
>>> *
>>> testsuite/g++.dg/coroutines/coro-bad-grooaf-01-grooaf-expected.C: Likewise.
>>> * testsuite/g++.dg/coroutines/pr97438.C: Likewise.
>>> * testsuite/g++.dg/coroutines/ramp-return-b.C: Likewise.
>>>
>>> Tested under Linux x86_64.
>>>
>>> I'm contributing to libstdc++ so I already have write access.
>>>
>>> Ok to commit ?
>> As author of the tests, this LGTM as a suitable fix for now (at least, once
>> the main
>> patch to fix versioned namespaces lands).
>
> I just realized it was a "go", no ? Then why after the main patch ?
>
> The "main patch" do not fix the versioned namespace. It just makes it adopt
> the cxx11 abi.
>
> This patch fixes a problem that is as old as the tests and that is totally
> unrelated with the main one. I just wanted to improve the situation so that
> versioned namespace mode do not look more buggy than necessary when someone
> (like you) run those.
Maybe a misunderstanding on my part. I was under the impression that
versioned-namespace was currently unusable because it forces the old string
ABI. If that is not the case, then I guess the changes are OK now.
I am pretty concerned about the maintainability of this tho, hence this …
>> However, IMO, this could become quite painful as more g++ tests make use of
>> std headers
>> (which is not really optional for facilities like this that are
>> tightly-coupled between the FE and
>> the library).
>>
>> For the future, it does seem that a more complete solution might be to
>> introduce a
>> testsuite-wide definition for the C++ versioned std:: introducer, so that we
>> can update it in one
>> place as the version changes.
>>
>> So (as a thought experiment):
>> - we’d have something of the form “CXX_STD” as a tcl global
>> - we’d add the presence/absence of versioning to the relevant site.exp
>> (which
>> means recognising the versioning choice also in the GCC configure)
>> - we’d migrate tests to using ${CXX_STD} instead of "std::__N” in matches
>>
>> … I guess an alternative could be to cook up some alternate warning/error/etc
>> match functions that cater for arbitrary inline namespaces but that seems
>> like a much
>> more tricky and invasive testsuite change.
>>
>> thoughts?
>
> I considered amending gcc/testsuite/lib/prune.exp to simply remove the
> version from the diagnostic. But the reply on why it was not working scared
> me, so this patch.
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2023-September/242526.html
Ah, I didn’t see that mail - will try to take a look at the weekend.
Iain
