www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

D.gnu - Should make unittest work with --enable-checking?

reply Johannes Pfau <nospam example.com> writes:
Is make unittest known to be broken when used with a compiler
configured with --enable-checking or should I file bug reports?

One failure seems related to #307, but there are some unrelated ones.
Here's the output (using GCC 4.6.2):
http://pastebin.com/PtNtTHG9

More important to me right now though:
It seems Makefile.am is missing the testgc target?
Feb 21 2012
next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On 21 February 2012 12:03, Johannes Pfau <nospam example.com> wrote:
 Is make unittest known to be broken when used with a compiler
 configured with --enable-checking or should I file bug reports?

 One failure seems related to #307, but there are some unrelated ones.
 Here's the output (using GCC 4.6.2):
 http://pastebin.com/PtNtTHG9

 More important to me right now though:
 It seems Makefile.am is missing the testgc target?

I'll have to check tonight. Can you reduce these down to minimal test cases? -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Feb 21 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent Trass3r <un known.com> writes:
 One failure seems related to #307, but there are some unrelated ones.
 Here's the output (using GCC 4.6.2):
 http://pastebin.com/PtNtTHG9

I'll have to check tonight. Can you reduce these down to minimal test cases?

DustMite gogogo.
Feb 21 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent Johannes Pfau <nospam example.com> writes:
Am Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:19:01 +0100
schrieb Trass3r <un known.com>:

 One failure seems related to #307, but there are some unrelated
 ones. Here's the output (using GCC 4.6.2):
 http://pastebin.com/PtNtTHG9

I'll have to check tonight. Can you reduce these down to minimal test cases?

DustMite gogogo.

Yep that's what I'll do next ;-)
Feb 21 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent Trass3r <un known.com> writes:
 DustMite gogogo.

Yep that's what I'll do next ;-)

Hmm indeed, lots of crashes when building the unittests. Reducing std.container ICE now.
Feb 21 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent Trass3r <un known.com> writes:
 I'll have to check tonight.  Can you reduce these down to minimal test  
 cases?

Think it's done. 6 new issues opened.
Feb 21 2012
prev sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On 21 February 2012 22:41, Trass3r <un known.com> wrote:
 I'll have to check tonight. =A0Can you reduce these down to minimal test
 cases?

Think it's done. 6 new issues opened.

boo hoo. :) --=20 Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) =3D (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Feb 21 2012