[m-rev.] diff: uci.exp

[Julien Fischer]

On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Zoltan Somogyi wrote:

> On 24-Apr-2007, Julien Fischer <juliensf at csse.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
>> Does the .exp2 file for that test case also need updating?
>
> I looked into that. The log messages for it did not square with its contents.
> I think the .exp2 file won't be matched, but I don't it has been matched for
> a long while now. If we could add it back later, I would delete it, but
> CVS is funny about adding back previously deleted files.

In that case I suggest doing what we do for some other unused .exp* files;
replace their contents with:

 	### THIS FILE IS NOT CURRENTLY USED ###

On a related note, I was wondering whether it is worth changing the coding
standard to require that test cases with multiple expected outputs should
have a comment at the start saying why they have them.  I know you can
(sometimes) look this information up in the CVS logs but certainly for some
of the test cases, the debugger ones in particular, where the are several
.exp files you sometimes have to go hunting through the logs of several files
to work out what they are all for.

Julien.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-reviews mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-reviews at csse.unimelb.edu.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-reviews at csse.unimelb.edu.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-reviews-request at csse.unimelb.edu.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------