| Message ID | 20200213071108.GC17695@tucnak |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | testsuite: Fix g++.dg/analyzer/pr93212.C with check-c++-all | expand |
On Thu, 2020-02-13 at 08:11 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 03:27:29PM -0500, David Malcolm wrote: > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > PR analyzer/93212 > > * g++.dg/analyzer/analyzer.exp: New subdirectory and .exp > > suite. > > * g++.dg/analyzer/malloc.C: New test. > > * g++.dg/analyzer/pr93212.C: New test. > > The test FAILs with c++11: > .../gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/analyzer/pr93212.C:4:1: error: 'lol' > function uses 'auto' type specifier without trailing return type > .../gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/analyzer/pr93212.C:4:1: note: deduced return > type only available with '-std=c++14' or '-std=gnu++14' > > Fixed thusly, regtested on x86_64-linux, committed to trunk as > obvious. Thanks Jakub, and sorry for the failure. I did some digging into why this got through my testing. My standard patch testing involves a bootstrap build with these three Makefile targets in sequence: make all make install make check each teed to a logfile, and with a suitable -j I hadn't noticed the check-c++-all in cp/Make-lang.in. I've been using "--target_board=unix\{-m32,-m64\}" in my RUNTESTFLAGS during development of a patch, but I notice now that I didn't have it in my bootstrap testing. I've fixed that, and added check-c++-all. Are there any other Makefile targets I should be testing with? Thanks Dave
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/analyzer/pr93212.C +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/analyzer/pr93212.C @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } } +// { dg-do compile { target c++14 } } #include <iostream> auto lol()