Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-24 Thread Kyrill Tkachov
On 24/10/16 12:01, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 10/21/2016 10:59 PM, Mike Stump wrote: On Oct 21, 2016, at 12:47 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: The latest patch works as expected for me, both with an operand and with stdin. But since I'm not empowered to approve it one of the others reviewers will need

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-24 Thread Bernd Schmidt
On 10/21/2016 10:59 PM, Mike Stump wrote: On Oct 21, 2016, at 12:47 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: The latest patch works as expected for me, both with an operand and with stdin. But since I'm not empowered to approve it one of the others reviewers will need to give it their blessing. Seems fine f

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-21 Thread Mike Stump
On Oct 21, 2016, at 12:47 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > > The latest patch works as expected for me, both with an operand > and with stdin. But since I'm not empowered to approve it one > of the others reviewers will need to give it their blessing. Seems fine from a test suite perspective, but not

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-21 Thread Martin Sebor
The latest patch works as expected for me, both with an operand and with stdin. But since I'm not empowered to approve it one of the others reviewers will need to give it their blessing. Thanks Martin On 10/21/2016 07:56 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Ping. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-1

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-21 Thread Kyrill Tkachov
Ping. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg00982.html Thanks, Kyrill On 13/10/16 09:11, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 12/10/16 17:49, Martin Sebor wrote: On 10/12/2016 06:43 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 12/10/16 11:18, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 12/10/16 10:57, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: O

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-13 Thread Kyrill Tkachov
On 12/10/16 17:49, Martin Sebor wrote: On 10/12/2016 06:43 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 12/10/16 11:18, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 12/10/16 10:57, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 11/10/16 20:19, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 01:11:04PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: Also, the pattern t

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-12 Thread Martin Sebor
On 10/12/2016 06:43 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 12/10/16 11:18, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 12/10/16 10:57, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 11/10/16 20:19, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 01:11:04PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: Also, the pattern that starts with "/\+\+\+" looks like it's

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-12 Thread Kyrill Tkachov
On 12/10/16 11:18, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 12/10/16 10:57, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 11/10/16 20:19, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 01:11:04PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: Also, the pattern that starts with "/\+\+\+" looks like it's missing the ^ anchor. Presumably it should be

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-12 Thread Kyrill Tkachov
On 12/10/16 10:57, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 11/10/16 20:19, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 01:11:04PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: Also, the pattern that starts with "/\+\+\+" looks like it's missing the ^ anchor. Presumably it should be "/^\+\+\+ \/testsuite\//". No, it will be

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-12 Thread Kyrill Tkachov
On 11/10/16 20:19, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 01:11:04PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: Also, the pattern that starts with "/\+\+\+" looks like it's missing the ^ anchor. Presumably it should be "/^\+\+\+ \/testsuite\//". No, it will be almost never +++ /testsuite/ There needs t

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-11 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 01:11:04PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: > Also, the pattern that starts with "/\+\+\+" looks like it's missing > the ^ anchor. Presumably it should be "/^\+\+\+ \/testsuite\//". No, it will be almost never +++ /testsuite/ There needs to be .* in between "+++ " and "/testsuit

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-11 Thread Martin Sebor
On 10/11/2016 09:22 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 11/10/16 16:13, Jeff Law wrote: On 10/11/2016 05:01 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 10/11/2016 12:56 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:47:21AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: check_GNU_style.sh complains a lot about dg-* directives

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-11 Thread Kyrill Tkachov
On 11/10/16 16:13, Jeff Law wrote: On 10/11/2016 05:01 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 10/11/2016 12:56 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:47:21AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: check_GNU_style.sh complains a lot about dg-* directives in the testsuite and in particular about line l

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-11 Thread Jeff Law
On 10/11/2016 05:01 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 10/11/2016 12:56 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:47:21AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: check_GNU_style.sh complains a lot about dg-* directives in the testsuite and in particular about line lengths. There's nothing we can do abo

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-11 Thread Kyrill Tkachov
On 11/10/16 11:56, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:47:21AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: check_GNU_style.sh complains a lot about dg-* directives in the testsuite and in particular about line lengths. There's nothing we can do about the directives and sometimes they're supposed

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-11 Thread Bernd Schmidt
On 10/11/2016 12:56 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:47:21AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: check_GNU_style.sh complains a lot about dg-* directives in the testsuite and in particular about line lengths. There's nothing we can do about the directives and sometimes they're suppo

Re: [PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-11 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:47:21AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > check_GNU_style.sh complains a lot about dg-* directives in the testsuite and > in particular about line lengths. > There's nothing we can do about the directives and sometimes they're supposed > to be long, in particular the scan-

[PATCH][check_GNU_style.sh] More aggressively ignore dg-xxx directives

2016-10-11 Thread Kyrill Tkachov
Hi all, check_GNU_style.sh complains a lot about dg-* directives in the testsuite and in particular about line lengths. There's nothing we can do about the directives and sometimes they're supposed to be long, in particular the scan-assembler checks in dg-final. Currently check_GNU_style.sh ha