Re: C89isms in the test suite

Sam James <[email protected]> Mon, 14 Nov 2022 04:36:17 +0000

Newsgroups	dev.linux.lists.c-std-porting
Message-ID	<[email protected]>


> On 21 Oct 2022, at 09:40, Florian Weimer via Gcc <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> What should we do about these when they are not relevant to what's being
> tested?  For example, gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/mzero6.c
> has this:
> 
>  int main ()
>  {
>    if (__builtin_copysign (1.0, func (0.0 / -5.0, 10)) != -1.0)
>      abort ();
>    exit (0);
>  }
> 
> but no include files, so abort and exit are implicitly declared.
> 
> Should we inject a header with -include with the most common
> declarations (which includes at least abort and exit)?  Or add the
> missing #include directives?  But the latter might not work for
> freestanding targets.
> 
> Implicit ints and function declarations without prototypes are also
> common (not just for main).
> 
> Other tests look like they might be intended to be built in C89 mode,
> e.g.  gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/386.c, although it's not
> immediately obvious to me what they test.

Would you be able to backport 6be2672e4ee41c566a9e072088cccca263bab5f7
and 885b6660c17fb91980b5682514ef54668e544b02 to the active <13
branches?

Thanks,
sam

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 358 B)