autoconf-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] introduce AT_SKIP_IF and AT_FAIL_IF


From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: [PATCH] introduce AT_SKIP_IF and AT_FAIL_IF
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 13:32:20 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-15)

* Eric Blake wrote on Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 04:10:22PM CEST:
> Paolo Bonzini <bonzini <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > > Part of me thinks it might be nice to change AT_XFAIL_IF to use similar
> > > semantics, but then the other part worries about backwards compatibility
> > 
> > I think it's not trivial either to change it.  I doubt it makes a 
> > difference in
> > practice, there are not many Autotest users and even fewer AT_XFAIL_IF
> > users.
> 
> Then let's leave AT_XFAIL_IF alone until (unless?) someone complains about it 
> being different in practice.

I think I can remember a couple of occasions where this particular
semantics of AT_XFAIL_IF was either unexpected or undesired; at
least within the Libtool testsuite it has caused some churn before.

However, I also think that changing the semantics is a problematic
thing to do, as it very likely breaks compatibility.  I am not sure
if it is better to document the current semantics, and maybe provide
another macro that updates xfail status at the point it is invoked.

Cheers,
Ralf




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]