2017-01-01 07:50:51 +01:00
# Copyright 1988-2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
# it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
2007-08-23 20:14:19 +02:00
# the Free Software Foundation; either version 3 of the License, or
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
# (at your option) any later version.
2007-08-23 20:14:19 +02:00
#
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
# GNU General Public License for more details.
2007-08-23 20:14:19 +02:00
#
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
2007-08-23 20:14:19 +02:00
# along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
#
# test special commands (if, while, etc)
#
test suite update - gdb.base/[cd]
Convert files gdb.base/[cd]*.exp to use standard_output_file et al.
* call-ar-st.exp, call-rt-st.exp, call-sc.exp,
call-signal-resume.exp, call-strs.exp, callexit.exp,
callfuncs.exp, catch-load.exp, catch-syscall.exp, charset.exp,
checkpoint.exp, chng-syms.exp, code-expr.exp, code_elim.exp,
commands.exp, completion.exp, complex.exp, cond-expr.exp,
condbreak.exp, consecutive.exp, constvars.exp, corefile.exp,
ctxobj.exp, cursal.exp, cvexpr.exp, dbx.exp, default.exp,
define.exp, del.exp, detach.exp, dfp-test.exp, display.exp,
dmsym.exp, dump.exp, dup-sect.exp: Use standard_testfile,
standard_output_file, prepare_for_testing, clean_restart.
2013-06-27 20:49:03 +02:00
standard_testfile
2016-12-23 17:52:18 +01:00
if { [prepare_for_testing "failed to prepare" commands run.c {debug additional_flags=-DFAKEARGV}] } {
2009-07-13 21:20:39 +02:00
return -1
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
}
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
# Run to FUNCTION. If that fails, issue a FAIL and make the caller
# return.
proc runto_or_return {function} {
if { ![runto factorial] } {
fail "cannot run to $function"
return -code return
}
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix gdbvar_simple_if_test {} {
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
global gdb_prompt
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
global valnum_re
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
gdb_test_no_output "set \$foo = 0" "set foo"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
# All this test should do is print 0xdeadbeef once.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test \
[multi_line_input \
{if $foo == 1} \
{ p/x 0xfeedface} \
{else} \
{ p/x 0xdeadbeef} \
{end}] \
"$valnum_re = 0xdeadbeef" \
"#1"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
# All this test should do is print 0xfeedface once.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test \
[multi_line_input \
{if $foo == 0} \
{ p/x 0xfeedface} \
{else} \
{ p/x 0xdeadbeef} \
{end}] \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface" \
"#2"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix gdbvar_simple_while_test {} {
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
global gdb_prompt
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
global valnum_re
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
gdb_test_no_output "set \$foo = 5" "set foo"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
# This test should print 0xfeedface five times.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test \
[multi_line_input \
{while $foo > 0} \
{ p/x 0xfeedface} \
{ set $foo -= 1} \
{end}] \
[multi_line \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface"] \
"#1"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix gdbvar_complex_if_while_test {} {
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
global gdb_prompt
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
global valnum_re
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test_no_output "set \$foo = 4" "set foo"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
# This test should alternate between 0xdeadbeef and 0xfeedface two times.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test \
[multi_line_input \
{while $foo > 0} \
{ set $foo -= 1} \
{ if ($foo % 2) == 1} \
{ p/x 0xdeadbeef} \
{ else} \
{ p/x 0xfeedface} \
{ end} \
{end}] \
[multi_line \
"$valnum_re = 0xdeadbeef" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface" \
"$valnum_re = 0xdeadbeef" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface"] \
"#1"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix progvar_simple_if_test {} {
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
global gdb_prompt
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
global valnum_re
runto_or_return factorial
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
# Don't depend upon argument passing, since most simulators don't
# currently support it. Bash value variable to be what we want.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test "p value=5" " = 5" "set value to 5"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
# All this test should do is print 0xdeadbeef once.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test \
[multi_line_input \
{if value == 1} \
{ p/x 0xfeedface} \
{else} \
{ p/x 0xdeadbeef} \
{end}] \
"$valnum_re = 0xdeadbeef" \
"#1"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
# All this test should do is print 0xfeedface once.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test \
[multi_line_input \
{if value == 5} \
{ p/x 0xfeedface} \
{else} \
{ p/x 0xdeadbeef} \
{end}] \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface" \
"#2"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix progvar_simple_while_test {} {
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
global gdb_prompt
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
global valnum_re
runto_or_return factorial
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
# Don't depend upon argument passing, since most simulators don't
# currently support it. Bash value variable to be what we want.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test "p value=5" " = 5" "set value to 5"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
# This test should print 0xfeedface five times.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test \
[multi_line_input \
{while value > 0} \
{ p/x 0xfeedface} \
{ set value -= 1} \
{end}] \
[multi_line \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface"] \
"#1"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix progvar_complex_if_while_test {} {
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
global gdb_prompt
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
global valnum_re
runto_or_return factorial
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
# Don't depend upon argument passing, since most simulators don't
# currently support it. Bash value variable to be what we want.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test "p value=4" " = 4" "set value to 4"
# This test should alternate between 0xdeadbeef and 0xfeedface two
# times.
gdb_test \
[multi_line_input \
{while value > 0} \
{ set value -= 1} \
{ if (value % 2) == 1} \
{ p/x 0xdeadbeef} \
{ else} \
{ p/x 0xfeedface} \
{ end} \
{end}] \
[multi_line \
"$valnum_re = 0xdeadbeef" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface" \
"$valnum_re = 0xdeadbeef" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface"] \
"#1"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix if_while_breakpoint_command_test {} {
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
global valnum_re
runto_or_return factorial
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
# Don't depend upon argument passing, since most simulators don't
# currently support it. Bash value variable to be what we want.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test "p value=5" " = 5" "set value to 5"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
delete_breakpoints
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
gdb_test "break factorial" "Breakpoint.*at.*" "break factorial"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
gdb_test_multiple "commands" "commands" {
-re "End with" {
pass "commands"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
}
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
# This test should alternate between 0xdeadbeef and 0xfeedface two times.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test \
[multi_line_input \
{while value > 0} \
{ set value -= 1} \
{ if (value % 2) == 1} \
{ p/x 0xdeadbeef} \
{ else} \
{ p/x 0xfeedface} \
{ end} \
{end} \
{end}] \
"" \
"commands part 2"
gdb_test \
"continue" \
[multi_line \
"$valnum_re = 0xdeadbeef" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface" \
"$valnum_re = 0xdeadbeef" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface"] \
"#1"
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
gdb_test "info break" "while.*set.*if.*p/x.*else.*p/x.*end.*"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
}
# Test that we can run the inferior from breakpoint commands.
2001-02-19 21:44:27 +01:00
#
# The expected behavior is that all commands after the first "step"
# shall be ignored. See the gdb manual, "Break Commands",
# subsection "Breakpoint command lists".
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix infrun_breakpoint_command_test {} {
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
runto_or_return factorial
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
# Don't depend upon argument passing, since most simulators don't
# currently support it. Bash value variable to be what we want.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test "p value=6" " = 6" "set value to 6"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
delete_breakpoints
gdb_test "break factorial if value == 5" "Breakpoint.*at.*"
2000-03-27 07:29:24 +02:00
# infrun_breakpoint_command_test - This test was broken into two parts
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
# to get around a synchronization problem in expect.
# part1: issue the gdb command "commands"
# part2: send the list of commands
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
set test "commands #1"
gdb_test_multiple "commands" $test {
-re "End with" {
pass $test
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
}
2001-02-19 21:44:27 +01:00
gdb_test "step\nstep\nstep\nstep\nend" "" \
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
"commands #2"
1999-06-28 18:06:02 +02:00
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
gdb_test "continue" \
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
"Continuing.*.*.*Breakpoint \[0-9\]*, factorial \\(value=5\\).*at.*\[0-9\]*\[ \]*if \\(value > 1\\) \{.*\[0-9\]*\[ \]*value \\*= factorial \\(value - 1\\);.*"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix breakpoint_command_test {} {
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
runto_or_return factorial
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
# Don't depend upon argument passing, since most simulators don't
# currently support it. Bash value variable to be what we want.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test "p value=6" " = 6" "set value to 6"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
delete_breakpoints
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
gdb_test "break factorial" "Breakpoint.*at.*"
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test \
[multi_line_input \
{commands} \
{ printf "Now the value is %d\n", value} \
{end}] \
"End with.*" \
"commands"
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
gdb_test "continue" \
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
"Breakpoint \[0-9\]*, factorial.*Now the value is 5"
gdb_test "print value" " = 5"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
}
# Test a simple user defined command (with arguments)
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix user_defined_command_test {} {
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
global gdb_prompt
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
global valnum_re
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
gdb_test_no_output "set \$foo = 4" "set foo"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
gdb_test_multiple "define mycommand" "define mycommand" {
-re "End with" {
pass "define mycommand"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
}
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
# This test should alternate between 0xdeadbeef and 0xfeedface two times.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test \
[multi_line_input \
{while $arg0 > 0} \
{ set $arg0 -= 1} \
{ if ($arg0 % 2) == 1} \
{ p/x 0xdeadbeef} \
{ else} \
{ p/x 0xfeedface} \
{ end} \
{end} \
{end}] \
"" \
"enter commands"
global decimal
set valnum_re "\\\$$decimal"
gdb_test \
{mycommand $foo} \
[multi_line \
"$valnum_re = 0xdeadbeef" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface" \
"$valnum_re = 0xdeadbeef" \
"$valnum_re = 0xfeedface"] \
"execute user-defined command"
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
gdb_test "show user mycommand" \
2001-12-13 23:42:23 +01:00
" while \\\$arg0.*set.* if \\\(\\\$arg0.*p/x.* else\[^\n\].*p/x.* end\[^\n\].* end\[^\n\].*" \
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
"display user command"
2014-09-08 01:12:19 +02:00
# Create and test a user-defined command with an empty body.
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
gdb_test_multiple "define myemptycommand" "define myemptycommand" {
-re "End with" {
pass "define myemptycommand"
2014-09-08 01:12:19 +02:00
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
}
2014-09-08 01:12:19 +02:00
gdb_test "end" \
"" \
"end definition of user-defined command with empty body"
gdb_test_no_output "myemptycommand" \
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
"execute user-defined empty command"
2014-09-08 01:12:19 +02:00
gdb_test "show user" \
"User command \"myemptycommand.*" \
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
"display empty command in command list"
2014-09-08 01:12:19 +02:00
gdb_test "show user myemptycommand" \
"User command \"myemptycommand.*" \
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
"display user-defined empty command"
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
}
Fix PR 20559 - "eval" command and $arg0...$arg9/$argc substitution
It'd be handy to be able to iterate over command arguments in
user-defined commands, in order to support optional arguments
($arg0..$argN).
I thought I could make it work with "eval", but alas, it doesn't work
currently. E.g., with:
define test
set $i = 0
while $i < $argc
eval "print $arg%d", $i
set $i = $i + 1
end
end
we get:
(gdb) test 1
$1 = void
(gdb) test 1 2 3
$2 = void
$3 = void
$4 = void
(gdb)
The problem is that "eval" doesn't do user-defined command arguments
substitution after expanding its own argument. This patch fixes that,
which makes the example above work:
(gdb) test 1
$1 = 1
(gdb) test 1 2 3
$2 = 1
$3 = 2
$4 = 3
(gdb)
New test included, similar the above, but also exercises expanding
$argc.
I think this is likely to simplify many scripts out there, so I'm
adding an example to the manual and mentioning it in NEWS as well.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-12-02 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
PR cli/20559
* NEWS: Mention "eval" expands user-defined command arguments.
* cli/cli-script.c (execute_control_command): Adjust to rename.
(insert_args): Rename to ...
(insert_user_defined_cmd_args): ... this, and make extern.
* cli/cli-script.h (insert_user_defined_cmd_args): New
declaration.
* printcmd.c: Include "cli/cli-script.h".
(eval_command): Call insert_user_defined_cmd_args.
gdb/doc/ChangeLog:
2016-12-02 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
PR cli/20559
* gdb.texinfo (Define): Add example of using "eval" to process a
variable number of arguments.
(Output) <eval>: Add anchor.
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-12-02 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
PR cli/20559
* gdb.base/commands.exp (user_defined_command_args_eval): New
procedure.
(top level): Call it.
2016-12-02 20:17:13 +01:00
# Test that "eval" in a user-defined command expands $argc/$argN.
proc_with_prefix user_defined_command_args_eval {} {
global gdb_prompt
gdb_test_multiple "define command_args_eval" \
"define command_args_eval" {
-re "End with" {
pass "define"
}
}
# Make a command that constructs references to $argc and $argN via
# eval.
gdb_test \
[multi_line \
{eval "printf \"argc = %%d,\", $arg%c", 'c'} \
{set $i = 0} \
{while $i < $argc} \
{ eval "printf \" %%d\", $arg%d", $i} \
{ set $i = $i + 1} \
{end} \
{printf "\n"} \
{end}] \
"" \
"enter commands"
gdb_test "command_args_eval 1 2 3" "argc = 3, 1 2 3" "execute command"
}
2016-12-02 20:17:13 +01:00
# Test that the $argc/$argN variables are pushed on/popped from the
# args stack correctly when a user-defined command calls another
# user-defined command (or in this case, recurses).
proc_with_prefix user_defined_command_args_stack_test {} {
global gdb_prompt
gdb_test_multiple "define args_stack_command" \
"define args_stack_command" {
-re "End with" {
pass "define"
}
}
# Make a command that refers to $argc/$argN before and after
# recursing. Also, vary the number of arguments passed to each
# recursion point.
gdb_test \
[multi_line \
{printf "before, argc = %d,", $argc} \
{set $i = 0} \
{while $i < $argc} \
{ eval "printf \" %%d\", $arg%d", $i} \
{ set $i = $i + 1} \
{end} \
{printf "\n"} \
{} \
{} \
{if $argc == 3} \
{ args_stack_command 21 22} \
{end} \
{if $argc == 2} \
{ args_stack_command 11} \
{end} \
{} \
{} \
{printf "after, argc = %d,", $argc} \
{set $i = 0} \
{while $i < $argc} \
{ eval "printf \" %%d\", $arg%d", $i} \
{ set $i = $i + 1} \
{end} \
{printf "\n"} \
{end}] \
"" \
"enter commands"
set expected \
[multi_line \
"before, argc = 3, 31 32 33" \
"before, argc = 2, 21 22" \
"before, argc = 1, 11" \
"after, argc = 1, 11" \
"after, argc = 2, 21 22" \
"after, argc = 3, 31 32 33"]
gdb_test "args_stack_command 31 32 33" $expected "execute command"
}
2016-12-02 20:17:14 +01:00
# Test a simple user defined command with many arguments. GDB <= 7.12
# used to have a hard coded limit of 10 arguments.
proc_with_prefix user_defined_command_manyargs_test {} {
global gdb_prompt
set test "define command"
gdb_test_multiple "define manyargs" $test {
-re "End with" {
pass $test
}
}
# Define a function that doubles its arguments.
gdb_test \
[multi_line \
{printf "nargs=%d:", $argc} \
{set $i = 0} \
{while $i < $argc} \
{ eval "printf \" %%d\", 2 * $arg%d\n", $i} \
{ set $i = $i + 1} \
{end} \
{printf "\n"} \
{end}] \
"" \
"enter commands"
# Some random number of arguments, as long as higher than 10.
set nargs 100
set cmd "manyargs"
for {set i 1} {$i <= $nargs} {incr i} {
append cmd " $i"
}
set expected "nargs=$nargs:"
for {set i 1} {$i <= $nargs} {incr i} {
append expected " " [expr 2 * $i]
}
gdb_test $cmd $expected "execute command"
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix watchpoint_command_test {} {
1999-06-28 18:06:02 +02:00
global gdb_prompt
2008-05-08 18:30:53 +02:00
# Disable hardware watchpoints if necessary.
if [target_info exists gdb,no_hardware_watchpoints] {
2010-06-04 01:54:18 +02:00
gdb_test_no_output "set can-use-hw-watchpoints 0" ""
2008-05-08 18:30:53 +02:00
}
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
runto_or_return factorial
1999-06-28 18:06:02 +02:00
delete_breakpoints
# Verify that we can create a watchpoint, and give it a commands
# list that continues the inferior. We set the watchpoint on a
# local variable, too, so that it self-deletes when the watched
# data goes out of scope.
#
# What should happen is: Each time the watchpoint triggers, it
# continues the inferior. Eventually, the watchpoint will self-
# delete, when the watched variable is out of scope. But by that
# time, the inferior should have exited. GDB shouldn't crash or
# anything untoward as a result of this.
#
set wp_id -1
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
gdb_test_multiple "watch local_var" "watch local_var" {
-re "\[Ww\]atchpoint (\[0-9\]*): local_var.*$gdb_prompt $" {
1999-06-28 18:06:02 +02:00
set wp_id $expect_out(1,string)
pass "watch local_var"
}
}
1999-04-26 20:34:20 +02:00
1999-06-28 18:06:02 +02:00
if {$wp_id == -1} {return}
2010-06-01 19:22:33 +02:00
gdb_test_multiple "commands $wp_id" "begin commands on watch" {
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
-re "Type commands for breakpoint.*, one per line.*>$" {
pass "begin commands on watch"
}
1999-06-28 18:06:02 +02:00
}
2011-05-24 17:03:30 +02:00
# See the 'No symbol "value...' fail below. This command will
# fail if it's executed in the wrong frame. If adjusting the
# test, make sure this property holds.
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
gdb_test_multiple "print value" "add print command to watch" {
-re ">$" {
pass "add print command to watch"
}
1999-06-28 18:06:02 +02:00
}
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
gdb_test_multiple "continue" "add continue command to watch" {
-re ">$" {
pass "add continue command to watch"
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
}
1999-06-28 18:06:02 +02:00
}
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
gdb_test "end" \
"" \
"end commands on watch"
2011-05-24 17:03:30 +02:00
set test "continue with watch"
2013-10-21 14:42:02 +02:00
set lno_1 [gdb_get_line_number "commands.exp: hw local_var out of scope" "run.c"]
set lno_2 [gdb_get_line_number "commands.exp: local_var out of scope" "run.c"]
2011-05-24 17:03:30 +02:00
gdb_test_multiple "continue" "$test" {
-re "No symbol \"value\" in current context.\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
# Happens if GDB actually runs the watchpoints commands,
# even though the watchpoint was deleted for not being in
# scope.
fail $test
}
2013-10-21 14:42:02 +02:00
-re "Continuing.*\[Ww\]atchpoint $wp_id deleted because the program has left the block in.*which its expression is valid.*run.c:($lno_1|$lno_2).*$gdb_prompt $" {
2011-05-24 17:03:30 +02:00
pass $test
}
}
1999-06-28 18:06:02 +02:00
}
1999-04-26 20:34:20 +02:00
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix test_command_prompt_position {} {
1999-04-26 20:34:20 +02:00
global gdb_prompt
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
global valnum_re
runto_or_return factorial
1999-04-26 20:34:20 +02:00
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
# Don't depend upon argument passing, since most simulators don't
# currently support it. Bash value variable to be what we want.
1999-04-26 20:34:20 +02:00
delete_breakpoints
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
gdb_test "break factorial" "Breakpoint.*at.*"
gdb_test "p value=5" ".*" "set value to 5"
1999-04-26 20:34:20 +02:00
# All this test should do is print 0xdeadbeef once.
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test \
[multi_line_input \
{if value == 1} \
{ p/x 0xfeedface} \
{else} \
{ p/x 0xdeadbeef} \
{end}] \
"$valnum_re = 0xdeadbeef" \
"if test"
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
# Now let's test for the correct position of the '>' in gdb's
# prompt for commands. It should be at the beginning of the line,
# and not after one space.
1999-04-26 20:34:20 +02:00
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
set test "> OK"
gdb_test_multiple "commands" $test {
-re "Type commands.*End with.*\[\r\n\]>$" {
gdb_test_multiple "printf \"Now the value is %d\\n\", value" $test {
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
-re "^printf.*value\r\n>$" {
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test_multiple "end" $test {
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
-re "^end\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
pass $test
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
}
}
}
}
}
}
1999-04-26 20:34:20 +02:00
}
2000-03-24 00:48:28 +01:00
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix deprecated_command_test {} {
2000-03-24 00:48:28 +01:00
gdb_test "maintenance deprecate blah" "Can't find command.*" \
2001-05-23 21:04:13 +02:00
"tried to deprecate non-existing command"
2000-03-24 00:48:28 +01:00
2010-06-01 23:29:21 +02:00
gdb_test_no_output "maintenance deprecate p \"new_p\"" "maintenance deprecate p \"new_p\" /1/"
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
gdb_test "p 5" \
"Warning: 'p', an alias for the command 'print' is deprecated.*Use 'new_p'.*" \
"p deprecated warning, with replacement"
2016-12-01 21:41:23 +01:00
gdb_test "p 5" ".\[0-9\]* = 5.*" "deprecated warning goes away /1/"
2000-03-24 00:48:28 +01:00
2010-06-01 23:29:21 +02:00
gdb_test_no_output "maintenance deprecate p \"new_p\"" "maintenance deprecate p \"new_p\" /2/"
gdb_test_no_output "maintenance deprecate print \"new_print\""
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
gdb_test "p 5" \
"Warning: command 'print' \\(p\\) is deprecated.*Use 'new_print'.*" \
"both alias and command are deprecated"
2016-12-01 21:41:23 +01:00
gdb_test "p 5" ".\[0-9\]* = 5.*" "deprecated warning goes away /2/"
2000-03-24 00:48:28 +01:00
2010-06-01 23:29:21 +02:00
gdb_test_no_output "maintenance deprecate set remote memory-read-packet-size \"srm\" " \
2001-05-23 21:04:13 +02:00
"deprecate long command /1/"
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
gdb_test "set remote memory-read-packet-size" \
"Warning: command 'set remote memory-read-packet-size' is deprecated.*Use 'srm'.*" \
2001-05-23 21:04:13 +02:00
"long command deprecated /1/"
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
2010-06-01 23:29:21 +02:00
gdb_test_no_output "maintenance deprecate set remote memory-read-packet-size" \
2001-05-23 21:04:13 +02:00
"deprecate long command /2/"
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
gdb_test "set remote memory-read-packet-size" \
"Warning: command 'set remote memory-read-packet-size' is deprecated.*No alternative known.*" \
2001-05-23 21:04:13 +02:00
"long command deprecated with no alternative /2/"
2000-10-24 20:36:32 +02:00
gdb_test "maintenance deprecate" \
"\"maintenance deprecate\".*" \
"deprecate with no arguments"
2000-03-24 00:48:28 +01:00
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix bp_deleted_in_command_test {} {
2002-08-27 03:09:09 +02:00
global gdb_prompt
2003-09-29 17:08:52 +02:00
2002-08-27 03:09:09 +02:00
delete_breakpoints
# Create a breakpoint, and associate a command-list to it, with
# one command that deletes this breakpoint.
gdb_test "break factorial" \
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
"Breakpoint \[0-9\]+ at .*: file .*run.c, line \[0-9\]+\."
2002-08-27 03:09:09 +02:00
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
gdb_test_multiple "commands" "begin commands" {
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
-re "Type commands for breakpoint.*>$" {
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
pass "begin commands"
2002-08-27 03:09:09 +02:00
}
}
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
gdb_test_multiple "silent" "add silent command" {
-re ">$" {
pass "add silent command"
}
2002-08-27 03:09:09 +02:00
}
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
gdb_test_multiple "clear factorial" "add clear command" {
-re ">$" {
pass "add clear command"
}
2002-08-27 03:09:09 +02:00
}
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
gdb_test_multiple "printf \"factorial command-list executed\\n\"" \
"add printf command" {
-re ">$" {
pass "add printf command"
}
2002-08-27 03:09:09 +02:00
}
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
gdb_test_multiple "cont" "add cont command" {
-re ">$" {
pass "add cont command"
}
}
gdb_test "end" \
"" \
"end commands"
2000-03-24 00:48:28 +01:00
2002-08-27 03:09:09 +02:00
gdb_run_cmd
2014-09-12 23:16:31 +02:00
gdb_test "" "factorial command-list executed.*" "run factorial until breakpoint"
2002-08-27 03:09:09 +02:00
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix temporary_breakpoint_commands {} {
2002-08-27 03:09:09 +02:00
global gdb_prompt
2003-09-29 17:08:52 +02:00
2002-08-27 03:09:09 +02:00
delete_breakpoints
# Create a temporary breakpoint, and associate a commands list to it.
# This test will verify that this commands list is executed when the
# breakpoint is hit.
gdb_test "tbreak factorial" \
2010-08-02 17:07:14 +02:00
"Temporary breakpoint \[0-9\]+ at .*: file .*run.c, line \[0-9\]+\." \
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
"breakpoint"
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
gdb_test_multiple "commands" \
"begin commands in bp_deleted_in_command_test" {
-re "Type commands for breakpoint.*>$" {
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
pass "begin commands"
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
}
}
gdb_test_multiple "silent" "add silent tbreak command" {
-re ">$" {
pass "add silent tbreak command"
2002-08-27 03:09:09 +02:00
}
}
2010-06-04 16:26:52 +02:00
gdb_test_multiple "printf \"factorial tbreak commands executed\\n\"" \
2010-05-25 00:03:59 +02:00
"add printf tbreak command" {
-re ">$" {
pass "add printf tbreak command"
}
}
gdb_test_multiple "cont" "add cont tbreak command" {
-re ">$" {
pass "add cont tbreak command"
}
}
gdb_test "end" \
"" \
"end tbreak commands"
2002-08-27 03:09:09 +02:00
gdb_run_cmd
2014-09-12 23:16:31 +02:00
gdb_test "" "factorial tbreak commands executed.*" \
"run factorial until temporary breakpoint"
2002-08-27 03:09:09 +02:00
}
2006-03-30 18:51:20 +02:00
# Test that GDB can handle $arg0 outside of user functions without
# crashing.
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix stray_arg0_test { } {
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
global valnum_re
2006-03-30 18:51:20 +02:00
gdb_test "print \$arg0" \
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
"$valnum_re = void" \
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
"#1"
2006-03-30 18:51:20 +02:00
gdb_test "if 1 == 1\nprint \$arg0\nend" \
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
"$valnum_re = void" \
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
"#2"
2006-03-30 18:51:20 +02:00
gdb_test "print \$arg0 = 1" \
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
"$valnum_re = 1" \
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
"#3"
2006-03-30 18:51:20 +02:00
gdb_test "print \$arg0" \
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
"$valnum_re = 1" \
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
"#4"
2006-03-30 18:51:20 +02:00
}
2006-04-07 15:31:15 +02:00
2010-01-01 12:11:34 +01:00
# Test that GDB is able to source a file with an indented comment.
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix source_file_with_indented_comment {} {
test suite update - gdb.base/[cd]
Convert files gdb.base/[cd]*.exp to use standard_output_file et al.
* call-ar-st.exp, call-rt-st.exp, call-sc.exp,
call-signal-resume.exp, call-strs.exp, callexit.exp,
callfuncs.exp, catch-load.exp, catch-syscall.exp, charset.exp,
checkpoint.exp, chng-syms.exp, code-expr.exp, code_elim.exp,
commands.exp, completion.exp, complex.exp, cond-expr.exp,
condbreak.exp, consecutive.exp, constvars.exp, corefile.exp,
ctxobj.exp, cursal.exp, cvexpr.exp, dbx.exp, default.exp,
define.exp, del.exp, detach.exp, dfp-test.exp, display.exp,
dmsym.exp, dump.exp, dup-sect.exp: Use standard_testfile,
standard_output_file, prepare_for_testing, clean_restart.
2013-06-27 20:49:03 +02:00
set file1 [standard_output_file file1]
set fd [open "$file1" w]
2010-01-01 12:11:34 +01:00
puts $fd \
{define my_fun
#indented comment
end
echo Done!\n}
close $fd
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
gdb_test "source $file1" "Done!" "source file"
2010-01-01 12:11:34 +01:00
}
2006-04-07 15:31:15 +02:00
# Test that GDB can handle arguments when sourcing files recursively.
# If the arguments are overwritten with ####### then the test has failed.
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix recursive_source_test {} {
test suite update - gdb.base/[cd]
Convert files gdb.base/[cd]*.exp to use standard_output_file et al.
* call-ar-st.exp, call-rt-st.exp, call-sc.exp,
call-signal-resume.exp, call-strs.exp, callexit.exp,
callfuncs.exp, catch-load.exp, catch-syscall.exp, charset.exp,
checkpoint.exp, chng-syms.exp, code-expr.exp, code_elim.exp,
commands.exp, completion.exp, complex.exp, cond-expr.exp,
condbreak.exp, consecutive.exp, constvars.exp, corefile.exp,
ctxobj.exp, cursal.exp, cvexpr.exp, dbx.exp, default.exp,
define.exp, del.exp, detach.exp, dfp-test.exp, display.exp,
dmsym.exp, dump.exp, dup-sect.exp: Use standard_testfile,
standard_output_file, prepare_for_testing, clean_restart.
2013-06-27 20:49:03 +02:00
set file1 [standard_output_file file1]
set file2 [standard_output_file file2]
set file3 [standard_output_file file3]
set fd [open "$file1" w]
2006-04-07 15:31:15 +02:00
puts $fd \
test suite update - gdb.base/[cd]
Convert files gdb.base/[cd]*.exp to use standard_output_file et al.
* call-ar-st.exp, call-rt-st.exp, call-sc.exp,
call-signal-resume.exp, call-strs.exp, callexit.exp,
callfuncs.exp, catch-load.exp, catch-syscall.exp, charset.exp,
checkpoint.exp, chng-syms.exp, code-expr.exp, code_elim.exp,
commands.exp, completion.exp, complex.exp, cond-expr.exp,
condbreak.exp, consecutive.exp, constvars.exp, corefile.exp,
ctxobj.exp, cursal.exp, cvexpr.exp, dbx.exp, default.exp,
define.exp, del.exp, detach.exp, dfp-test.exp, display.exp,
dmsym.exp, dump.exp, dup-sect.exp: Use standard_testfile,
standard_output_file, prepare_for_testing, clean_restart.
2013-06-27 20:49:03 +02:00
"source $file2
abcdef qwerty"
2006-04-07 15:31:15 +02:00
close $fd
test suite update - gdb.base/[cd]
Convert files gdb.base/[cd]*.exp to use standard_output_file et al.
* call-ar-st.exp, call-rt-st.exp, call-sc.exp,
call-signal-resume.exp, call-strs.exp, callexit.exp,
callfuncs.exp, catch-load.exp, catch-syscall.exp, charset.exp,
checkpoint.exp, chng-syms.exp, code-expr.exp, code_elim.exp,
commands.exp, completion.exp, complex.exp, cond-expr.exp,
condbreak.exp, consecutive.exp, constvars.exp, corefile.exp,
ctxobj.exp, cursal.exp, cvexpr.exp, dbx.exp, default.exp,
define.exp, del.exp, detach.exp, dfp-test.exp, display.exp,
dmsym.exp, dump.exp, dup-sect.exp: Use standard_testfile,
standard_output_file, prepare_for_testing, clean_restart.
2013-06-27 20:49:03 +02:00
set fd [open "$file2" w]
2006-04-07 15:31:15 +02:00
puts $fd \
test suite update - gdb.base/[cd]
Convert files gdb.base/[cd]*.exp to use standard_output_file et al.
* call-ar-st.exp, call-rt-st.exp, call-sc.exp,
call-signal-resume.exp, call-strs.exp, callexit.exp,
callfuncs.exp, catch-load.exp, catch-syscall.exp, charset.exp,
checkpoint.exp, chng-syms.exp, code-expr.exp, code_elim.exp,
commands.exp, completion.exp, complex.exp, cond-expr.exp,
condbreak.exp, consecutive.exp, constvars.exp, corefile.exp,
ctxobj.exp, cursal.exp, cvexpr.exp, dbx.exp, default.exp,
define.exp, del.exp, detach.exp, dfp-test.exp, display.exp,
dmsym.exp, dump.exp, dup-sect.exp: Use standard_testfile,
standard_output_file, prepare_for_testing, clean_restart.
2013-06-27 20:49:03 +02:00
"define abcdef
echo 1: <<<\$arg0>>>\\n
source $file3
echo 2: <<<\$arg0>>>\\n
end"
2006-04-07 15:31:15 +02:00
close $fd
test suite update - gdb.base/[cd]
Convert files gdb.base/[cd]*.exp to use standard_output_file et al.
* call-ar-st.exp, call-rt-st.exp, call-sc.exp,
call-signal-resume.exp, call-strs.exp, callexit.exp,
callfuncs.exp, catch-load.exp, catch-syscall.exp, charset.exp,
checkpoint.exp, chng-syms.exp, code-expr.exp, code_elim.exp,
commands.exp, completion.exp, complex.exp, cond-expr.exp,
condbreak.exp, consecutive.exp, constvars.exp, corefile.exp,
ctxobj.exp, cursal.exp, cvexpr.exp, dbx.exp, default.exp,
define.exp, del.exp, detach.exp, dfp-test.exp, display.exp,
dmsym.exp, dump.exp, dup-sect.exp: Use standard_testfile,
standard_output_file, prepare_for_testing, clean_restart.
2013-06-27 20:49:03 +02:00
set fd [open "$file3" w]
2006-04-07 15:31:15 +02:00
puts $fd \
"echo in file3\\n
#################################################################"
close $fd
test suite update - gdb.base/[cd]
Convert files gdb.base/[cd]*.exp to use standard_output_file et al.
* call-ar-st.exp, call-rt-st.exp, call-sc.exp,
call-signal-resume.exp, call-strs.exp, callexit.exp,
callfuncs.exp, catch-load.exp, catch-syscall.exp, charset.exp,
checkpoint.exp, chng-syms.exp, code-expr.exp, code_elim.exp,
commands.exp, completion.exp, complex.exp, cond-expr.exp,
condbreak.exp, consecutive.exp, constvars.exp, corefile.exp,
ctxobj.exp, cursal.exp, cvexpr.exp, dbx.exp, default.exp,
define.exp, del.exp, detach.exp, dfp-test.exp, display.exp,
dmsym.exp, dump.exp, dup-sect.exp: Use standard_testfile,
standard_output_file, prepare_for_testing, clean_restart.
2013-06-27 20:49:03 +02:00
gdb_test "source $file1" \
2006-04-07 15:31:15 +02:00
"1: <<<qwerty>>>\[\r\n]+in file3\[\r\n]+2: <<<qwerty>>>" \
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
"source file"
2006-04-07 15:31:15 +02:00
test suite update - gdb.base/[cd]
Convert files gdb.base/[cd]*.exp to use standard_output_file et al.
* call-ar-st.exp, call-rt-st.exp, call-sc.exp,
call-signal-resume.exp, call-strs.exp, callexit.exp,
callfuncs.exp, catch-load.exp, catch-syscall.exp, charset.exp,
checkpoint.exp, chng-syms.exp, code-expr.exp, code_elim.exp,
commands.exp, completion.exp, complex.exp, cond-expr.exp,
condbreak.exp, consecutive.exp, constvars.exp, corefile.exp,
ctxobj.exp, cursal.exp, cvexpr.exp, dbx.exp, default.exp,
define.exp, del.exp, detach.exp, dfp-test.exp, display.exp,
dmsym.exp, dump.exp, dup-sect.exp: Use standard_testfile,
standard_output_file, prepare_for_testing, clean_restart.
2013-06-27 20:49:03 +02:00
file delete $file1
file delete $file2
file delete $file3
2006-04-07 15:31:15 +02:00
}
2007-01-29 17:22:36 +01:00
proc gdb_test_no_prompt { command result msg } {
global gdb_prompt
set msg "$command - $msg"
set result "^[string_to_regexp $command]\r\n$result$"
gdb_test_multiple $command $msg {
-re "$result" {
pass $msg
return 1
}
-re "\r\n *>$" {
fail $msg
return 0
}
}
return 0
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix if_commands_test {} {
2007-01-29 17:22:36 +01:00
global gdb_prompt
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
gdb_test_no_output "set \$tem = 1" "set \$tem"
2007-01-29 17:22:36 +01:00
set test "if_commands_test 1"
gdb_test_no_prompt "if \$tem == 2" { >} $test
gdb_test_no_prompt "break main" { >} $test
gdb_test_no_prompt "else" { >} $test
gdb_test_no_prompt "break factorial" { >} $test
gdb_test_no_prompt "commands" { >} $test
gdb_test_no_prompt "silent" { >} $test
gdb_test_no_prompt "set \$tem = 3" { >} $test
gdb_test_no_prompt "continue" { >} $test
gdb_test_multiple "end" "first end - $test" {
-re " >\$" {
pass "first end - $test"
}
-re "\r\n>\$" {
fail "first end - $test"
}
}
gdb_test_multiple "end" "second end - $test" {
2010-08-02 17:07:14 +02:00
-re "Breakpoint \[0-9\]+ at .*: file .*run.c, line \[0-9\]+\.\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
2007-01-29 17:22:36 +01:00
pass "second end - $test"
}
-re "Undefined command: \"silent\".*$gdb_prompt $" {
fail "second end - $test"
}
}
set test "if_commands_test 2"
gdb_test_no_prompt "if \$tem == 1" { >} $test
gdb_test_no_prompt "break main" { >} $test
gdb_test_no_prompt "else" { >} $test
gdb_test_no_prompt "break factorial" { >} $test
gdb_test_no_prompt "commands" { >} $test
gdb_test_no_prompt "silent" { >} $test
gdb_test_no_prompt "set \$tem = 3" { >} $test
gdb_test_no_prompt "continue" { >} $test
gdb_test_multiple "end" "first end - $test" {
-re " >\$" {
pass "first end - $test"
}
-re "\r\n>\$" {
fail "first end - $test"
}
}
gdb_test_multiple "end" "second end - $test" {
2010-08-02 17:07:14 +02:00
-re "Breakpoint \[0-9\]+ at .*: file .*run.c, line \[0-9\]+\.\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
2007-01-29 17:22:36 +01:00
pass "second end - $test"
}
}
}
2011-08-26 23:45:24 +02:00
# Verify an error during "commands" commands execution will prevent any other
# "commands" from other breakpoints at the same location to be executed.
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix error_clears_commands_left {} {
2011-08-26 23:45:24 +02:00
set test "hook-stop 1"
gdb_test_multiple {define hook-stop} $test {
-re "End with a line saying just \"end\"\\.\r\n>$" {
pass $test
}
}
set test "hook-stop 1a"
gdb_test_multiple {echo hook-stop1\n} $test {
-re "\r\n>$" {
pass $test
}
}
gdb_test_no_output "end" "hook-stop 1b"
delete_breakpoints
gdb_breakpoint "main"
set test "main commands 1"
gdb_test_multiple {commands $bpnum} $test {
-re "End with a line saying just \"end\"\\.\r\n>$" {
pass $test
}
}
set test "main commands 1a"
gdb_test_multiple {echo cmd1\n} $test {
-re "\r\n>$" {
pass $test
}
}
set test "main commands 1b"
gdb_test_multiple {errorcommandxy\n} $test {
-re "\r\n>$" {
pass $test
}
}
gdb_test_no_output "end" "main commands 1c"
gdb_breakpoint "main"
set test "main commands 2"
gdb_test_multiple {commands $bpnum} $test {
-re "End with a line saying just \"end\"\\.\r\n>$" {
pass $test
}
}
set test "main commands 2a"
gdb_test_multiple {echo cmd2\n} $test {
-re "\r\n>$" {
pass $test
}
}
set test "main commands 2b"
gdb_test_multiple {errorcommandyz\n} $test {
-re "\r\n>$" {
pass $test
}
}
gdb_test_no_output "end" "main commands 2c"
gdb_run_cmd
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test \
"" \
[multi_line \
"hook-stop1" \
".*" \
"cmd1" \
"Undefined command: \"errorcommandxy\"\\. Try \"help\"\\."] \
"cmd1 error"
2011-08-26 23:45:24 +02:00
gdb_test {echo idle\n} "\r\nidle" "no cmd2"
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix redefine_hook_test {} {
2008-12-12 18:58:48 +01:00
global gdb_prompt
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test \
[multi_line_input \
"define one"\
"end"] \
"" \
"define one"
2008-12-12 18:58:48 +01:00
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test \
[multi_line_input \
"define hook-one" \
"echo hibob\\n" \
"end"] \
"" \
"define hook-one"
2008-12-12 18:58:48 +01:00
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
set test "redefine one"
gdb_test_multiple "define one" $test {
2008-12-12 18:58:48 +01:00
-re "Redefine command .one.. .y or n. $" {
send_gdb "y\n"
exp_continue
}
-re "End with" {
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
pass $test
2008-12-12 18:58:48 +01:00
}
}
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test "end" "" "enter commands for one redefinition"
2008-12-12 18:58:48 +01:00
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test "one" "hibob" "execute one command"
2008-12-12 18:58:48 +01:00
}
gdb/testsuite: Introduce "proc_with_prefix"
While adding new tests to gdb.base/commands.exp, I noticed that the
file includes a bunch of individual testcases split into their own
procedures, and that none have ever been adjusted to use
with_test_prefix. Instead, each gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple/etc
invocation takes care of including the procedure name in the test
message, in order to make sure test messages are unique.
Simon convinced me that using the procedure name as prefix is not that
bad of an idea:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00020.html
This commit adds an IMO simpler alternative to
with_test_prefix_procname added by that patch -- a new
"proc_with_prefix" convenience proc that is meant to be used in place
of "proc", and then uses it in commands.exp. Procedures defined with
this automatically run their bodies under with_test_prefix $proc_name.
Here's a sample of the resulting gdb.sum diff:
[...]
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: break factorial #3
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: set value to 5 in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: if test in test_command_prompt_position
-PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: > OK in test_command_prompt_position
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: break factorial
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: set value to 5
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: if test
+PASS: gdb.base/commands.exp: test_command_prompt_position: > OK
[...]
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (gdbvar_simple_if_test)
(gdbvar_simple_while_test, gdbvar_complex_if_while_test)
(progvar_simple_if_test, progvar_simple_while_test)
(progvar_complex_if_while_test, if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, deprecated_command_test)
(bp_deleted_in_command, temporary_breakpoint_commands)
(stray_arg0_test, source_file_with_indented_comment)
(recursive_source_test, if_commands_test)
(error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use proc_with_prefix.
* lib/gdb.exp (proc_with_prefix): New proc.
2016-11-09 16:45:49 +01:00
proc_with_prefix redefine_backtrace_test {} {
2008-12-10 02:05:16 +01:00
global gdb_prompt
gdb_test_multiple "define backtrace" "define backtrace" {
2011-04-13 17:54:05 +02:00
-re "Really redefine built-in command \"backtrace\"\\? \\(y or n\\) $" {
pass "define backtrace"
2008-12-10 02:05:16 +01:00
}
2011-04-13 17:54:05 +02:00
}
2008-12-10 02:05:16 +01:00
2011-04-13 17:54:05 +02:00
gdb_test_multiple "y" "expect response to define backtrace" {
-re "End with a line saying just \"end\"\\.\r\n>$" {
pass "expect response to define backtrace"
2008-12-10 02:05:16 +01:00
}
}
2011-04-13 17:54:05 +02:00
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test \
[multi_line_input \
"echo hibob\\n" \
"end"] \
"" \
"enter commands"
2008-12-10 02:05:16 +01:00
Further cleanup/modernization of gdb.base/commands.exp
- Use multi_line for matching multi-line GDB output.
- Add a multi_line_input variant of multi_line to build GDB input and
use it throughout.
(The two changes above make the tests much more readable, IMO.)
- Add a new valnum_re global to get rid of the multiple "\\\$\[0-9\]*".
- Remove gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
- tighten a few regexps.
- Replace send_gdb/gdb_expect with gdb_test_multiple and simplify,
making pass/fail messages the same.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-11-09 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/commands.exp (runto_or_return): New procedure.
(gdbvar_simple_if_test, gdbvar_simple_while_test)
(gdbvar_complex_if_while_test, progvar_simple_if_test)
(progvar_simple_while_test, progvar_complex_if_while_test)
(if_while_breakpoint_command_test)
(infrun_breakpoint_command_test, breakpoint_command_test)
(user_defined_command_test, watchpoint_command_test)
(test_command_prompt_position, redefine_hook_test)
(stray_arg0_test, error_clears_commands_left, redefine_hook_test)
(redefine_backtrace_test): Use runto_or_return, $valnum_re,
multi_line_input and multi_line. Remove gdb_expect and
gdb_stop_suppressing_tests uses.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
* lib/gdb.exp (valnum_re): New global.
(multi_line_input): New procedure.
2016-11-09 19:48:25 +01:00
gdb_test "backtrace" "hibob" "execute backtrace command"
gdb_test "bt" "hibob" "execute bt command"
2008-12-10 02:05:16 +01:00
}
Fix PR 21218: GDB dumps core when escaping newline in multi-line command
With commit 3b12939dfc2399 ("Replace the sync_execution global with a
new enum prompt_state tristate"), GDB started aborting if you try
splitting an input line with a continuation char (backslash) while in
a multi-line command:
(gdb) commands
Type commands for breakpoint(s) 1, one per line.
End with a line saying just "end".
>print \
(gdb) 1 # note "(gdb)" incorrectly printed here.
>end
readline: readline_callback_read_char() called with no handler!
$
That abort is actually a symptom of an old problem introduced when
gdb_readline_wrapper was rewritten to use asynchronous readline, back
in 2007. Note how the "(gdb)" prompt is printed above in the "(gdb)
1" line. Clearly it shouldn't be there, but it already was before the
commit mentioned above. Fixing that also fixes the readline abort
shown above.
The problem starts when command_line_input passes a NULL prompt to
gdb_readline_wrapper when it finds previous incomplete input due to a
backslash, trying to fetch more input without printing another ">"
secondary prompt. That itself should not be a problem, because
passing NULL to gdb_readline_wrapper has the same meaning as passing a
pointer to empty string, since gdb_readline_wrapper exposes the same
interface as 'readline(char *)'. However, gdb_readline_wrapper passes
the prompt argument directly to display_gdb_prompt, and for the
latter, a NULL prompt argument has a different meaning - it requests
printing the primary prompt.
Before commit 782a7b8ef9c096 (which rewrote gdb_readline_wrapper to
use asynchronous readline), GDB behaved like this:
(gdb) commands
[....]
>print \
1
>end
(gdb)
The above is what this commit restores GDB back to.
New test included.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2017-03-08 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
PR cli/21218
* top.c (gdb_readline_wrapper): Avoid passing NULL to
display_gdb_prompt.
(command_line_input): Add comment.
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2017-03-08 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
PR cli/21218
* gdb.base/commands.exp (backslash_in_multi_line_command_test):
New proc.
(top level): Call it.
2017-03-08 12:41:35 +01:00
# Test an input line split with a continuation character (backslash)
# while entering a multi-line command (in a secondary prompt).
proc_with_prefix backslash_in_multi_line_command_test {} {
gdb_breakpoint "main"
gdb_test_multiple "commands" "commands" {
-re "End with a line saying just \"end\"\\.\r\n>$" {
pass "commands"
}
}
set test "input line split with backslash"
send_gdb "print \\\nargc\n"
gdb_test_multiple "" $test {
-re "^print \\\\\r\nargc\r\n>$" {
pass $test
}
}
gdb_test_no_output "end"
# Input any command, just to be sure the readline state is sane.
# In PR 21218, this would trigger the infamous:
# readline: readline_callback_read_char() called with no handler!
gdb_test "print 1" "" "run command"
}
1999-04-16 03:35:26 +02:00
gdbvar_simple_if_test
gdbvar_simple_while_test
gdbvar_complex_if_while_test
progvar_simple_if_test
progvar_simple_while_test
progvar_complex_if_while_test
if_while_breakpoint_command_test
infrun_breakpoint_command_test
breakpoint_command_test
user_defined_command_test
Fix PR 20559 - "eval" command and $arg0...$arg9/$argc substitution
It'd be handy to be able to iterate over command arguments in
user-defined commands, in order to support optional arguments
($arg0..$argN).
I thought I could make it work with "eval", but alas, it doesn't work
currently. E.g., with:
define test
set $i = 0
while $i < $argc
eval "print $arg%d", $i
set $i = $i + 1
end
end
we get:
(gdb) test 1
$1 = void
(gdb) test 1 2 3
$2 = void
$3 = void
$4 = void
(gdb)
The problem is that "eval" doesn't do user-defined command arguments
substitution after expanding its own argument. This patch fixes that,
which makes the example above work:
(gdb) test 1
$1 = 1
(gdb) test 1 2 3
$2 = 1
$3 = 2
$4 = 3
(gdb)
New test included, similar the above, but also exercises expanding
$argc.
I think this is likely to simplify many scripts out there, so I'm
adding an example to the manual and mentioning it in NEWS as well.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2016-12-02 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
PR cli/20559
* NEWS: Mention "eval" expands user-defined command arguments.
* cli/cli-script.c (execute_control_command): Adjust to rename.
(insert_args): Rename to ...
(insert_user_defined_cmd_args): ... this, and make extern.
* cli/cli-script.h (insert_user_defined_cmd_args): New
declaration.
* printcmd.c: Include "cli/cli-script.h".
(eval_command): Call insert_user_defined_cmd_args.
gdb/doc/ChangeLog:
2016-12-02 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
PR cli/20559
* gdb.texinfo (Define): Add example of using "eval" to process a
variable number of arguments.
(Output) <eval>: Add anchor.
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-12-02 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
PR cli/20559
* gdb.base/commands.exp (user_defined_command_args_eval): New
procedure.
(top level): Call it.
2016-12-02 20:17:13 +01:00
user_defined_command_args_eval
2016-12-02 20:17:13 +01:00
user_defined_command_args_stack_test
2016-12-02 20:17:14 +01:00
user_defined_command_manyargs_test
1999-06-28 18:06:02 +02:00
watchpoint_command_test
1999-04-26 20:34:20 +02:00
test_command_prompt_position
2000-03-24 00:48:28 +01:00
deprecated_command_test
2002-08-27 03:09:09 +02:00
bp_deleted_in_command_test
temporary_breakpoint_commands
2006-03-30 18:51:20 +02:00
stray_arg0_test
2010-01-01 12:11:34 +01:00
source_file_with_indented_comment
2006-04-07 15:31:15 +02:00
recursive_source_test
2007-01-29 17:22:36 +01:00
if_commands_test
2011-08-26 23:45:24 +02:00
error_clears_commands_left
2008-12-12 18:58:48 +01:00
redefine_hook_test
Fix PR 21218: GDB dumps core when escaping newline in multi-line command
With commit 3b12939dfc2399 ("Replace the sync_execution global with a
new enum prompt_state tristate"), GDB started aborting if you try
splitting an input line with a continuation char (backslash) while in
a multi-line command:
(gdb) commands
Type commands for breakpoint(s) 1, one per line.
End with a line saying just "end".
>print \
(gdb) 1 # note "(gdb)" incorrectly printed here.
>end
readline: readline_callback_read_char() called with no handler!
$
That abort is actually a symptom of an old problem introduced when
gdb_readline_wrapper was rewritten to use asynchronous readline, back
in 2007. Note how the "(gdb)" prompt is printed above in the "(gdb)
1" line. Clearly it shouldn't be there, but it already was before the
commit mentioned above. Fixing that also fixes the readline abort
shown above.
The problem starts when command_line_input passes a NULL prompt to
gdb_readline_wrapper when it finds previous incomplete input due to a
backslash, trying to fetch more input without printing another ">"
secondary prompt. That itself should not be a problem, because
passing NULL to gdb_readline_wrapper has the same meaning as passing a
pointer to empty string, since gdb_readline_wrapper exposes the same
interface as 'readline(char *)'. However, gdb_readline_wrapper passes
the prompt argument directly to display_gdb_prompt, and for the
latter, a NULL prompt argument has a different meaning - it requests
printing the primary prompt.
Before commit 782a7b8ef9c096 (which rewrote gdb_readline_wrapper to
use asynchronous readline), GDB behaved like this:
(gdb) commands
[....]
>print \
1
>end
(gdb)
The above is what this commit restores GDB back to.
New test included.
gdb/ChangeLog:
2017-03-08 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
PR cli/21218
* top.c (gdb_readline_wrapper): Avoid passing NULL to
display_gdb_prompt.
(command_line_input): Add comment.
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2017-03-08 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
PR cli/21218
* gdb.base/commands.exp (backslash_in_multi_line_command_test):
New proc.
(top level): Call it.
2017-03-08 12:41:35 +01:00
backslash_in_multi_line_command_test
2008-12-10 02:05:16 +01:00
# This one should come last, as it redefines "backtrace".
redefine_backtrace_test