From: "Dan'l Miller" <optikos@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: FYI - ACATS test results for GCC 8.1.1 (mingw)
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 12:03:12 -0700 (PDT)
Date: 2018-06-20T12:03:12-07:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3c528c3e-2703-459f-b310-d297d1050afa@googlegroups.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <lywoution0.fsf@pushface.org>
On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 8:16:53 AM UTC-5, Simon Wright wrote:
> Note that I should maybe categorise some of the tests as XFAIL (expected
> to fail), e.g. cxag003, so that when the bug is corrected it will show
> up as an XPASS (wasn't expected to pass).
No, please don't do that. That would be incredibly confusing. A long-term bug is still a bug. (A deviance from the _LRM_ is still a bug, even if Robert Dewar coded it himself in 1993 and GNAT has stated officially that the sun will burn out before they fix it.) Just because we expect a bug to be there long-term, doesn't mean that that test-case should cover up the bug to cook the books to make it look good.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-20 19:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-20 12:17 FYI - ACATS test results for GCC 8.1.1 (mingw) alby.gamper
2018-06-20 13:16 ` Simon Wright
2018-06-20 19:03 ` Dan'l Miller [this message]
2018-06-21 14:46 ` Simon Wright
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox