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