This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA] completer test [was Re: [RFC] Cleanup for make_source_files_completion_list]
- From: Stan Shebs <stanshebs at earthlink dot net>
- To: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 17:27:09 -0700
- Subject: Re: [RFA] completer test [was Re: [RFC] Cleanup for make_source_files_completion_list]
- References: <51895A2F dot 8000504 at redhat dot com> <CADPb22Sj_5Bp+FhoQYk_9vR5c1D3fXsw4gLFu7v+jmDNSaOPFg at mail dot gmail dot com> <5191340B dot 60100 at redhat dot com> <519156F5 dot 5090000 at redhat dot com> <5193C786 dot 4000207 at redhat dot com> <5193E2DC dot 5000200 at redhat dot com> <m3r4h7kh4p dot fsf at redhat dot com> <51941E85 dot 8010104 at redhat dot com>
On 5/15/13 4:47 PM, Keith Seitz wrote:
> On 05/15/2013 03:33 PM, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
>> Wouldn't it be better to use the "complete" command? Here is what I see
>> when I use it:
>>
>> (gdb) complete break filesy
>> break filesym
>> break filesym.c
>
> Is that necessarily "better" than testing what a user would actually
> type? I don't know. gdb.base/completion.exp uses both forms.
>
>> Also, ISTR "send_gdb" is deprecated, and one should use
>> "gdb_test_multiple" instead. WDYT?
>
> Is send_gdb deprecated or gdb_expect? Or is their direct use discouraged?
>
> This is the first I've heard of send_gdb being deprecated. As far as I
> can tell, there is no other way to directly test completion this way. I
> do see, though, that completion.exp uses gdb_test_multiple instead of
> gdb_expect... If it truly is deprecated, I would expect send_gdb to be
> made "private" in some way. [deprecated_send_gdb?] Or at least mentioned
> in lib/gdb.exp.
I think send_gdb and gdb_expect are still key building blocks, but most
of their uses have been for multi-outcome tests that can be done as well
or better with gdb_test_multiple.
It may even be that gdb_test_multiple suffices for all of the existing
send_gdb/gdb_expect pairs, but I don't imagine anyone has the fortitude
to work through every one of them. :-)
Stan
stan@codesourcery.com