Re: Providing more precise "excess errors" message in DejaGnu

On 8/28/25 10:10, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 8/28/25 8:09 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>> On 28/08/2025 15:01, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>>> [...]
>>
>> Well really, the compare-tests script should report duplicate results 
>> as a problem as well, since
>>
>> PASS: abcd
>> ...
>> PASS: abcd
>>
>> is just a dup pass/fail waiting to happen.
> Yup.  A duplicate testname should be reported.  These cause major 
> headaches if one passes, but the other fails -- it looks like a 
> regression to the comparison scripting we have.

The problem with detecting duplicate names in the DejaGnu framework is 
that it would add memory overhead that scales with the number of tests 
and DejaGnu tries to avoid that kind of unbounded space requirement.  
(OK, it *is* bounded for any finite testsuite, but the idea of a 
steadily growing memory footprint during a test run still bothers me.)

I suggest that the comparison script GCC uses is probably the best place 
to check for duplicate test names, since that seems to also be the 
script that can be confused by them.


-- Jacob