From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server1.sourceware.org [209.132.180.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4365D1F454 for ; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 16:55:21 +0000 (UTC) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=fm0lV4rLnmLvmXLe 7//0tOcJal8O8pILmwysn3XySQaTImJjcrlib9nQdsXYGyAVcPTZkwbfLoF7/5Jo OAhx2o7GDj+rul53n2SEMwMQiO7pC2DIjDV6SjXcuWmf/R9zsOMlVJGeXY6vsKwp Ux9cXi5mjFUnfmtMyGqeb9E/Uak= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=R8nohyi4hl6QzAIDZ3HWfw n/B9c=; b=TXi1rJ7UC+EXmg6GUoFqhMwXeHiXQbmj3Y4UA6sJgJ3LxtKlgGbZBf vx3lPxf0/BFmb0Lan4fIAvHHnEMH+WQg4gy4xNaIin1GYk2AwWGf/fg57R2+Z7MB QCuhMjHB+3NKVczOf0oTRgyCnLF/7K7RgUWnBpr119D6HBQqQEQJ0= Received: (qmail 57605 invoked by alias); 4 Nov 2019 16:55:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 57595 invoked by uid 89); 4 Nov 2019 16:55:18 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-HELO: mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/30] ldbl-128ibm-compat: Test positional arguments To: "Gabriel F. T. Gomes" , libc-alpha@sourceware.org References: <20191025153410.15405-1-gabriel@inconstante.net.br> <20191025153410.15405-7-gabriel@inconstante.net.br> From: Paul E Murphy Message-ID: <34a497cb-9a69-5c50-c491-5717f7e089c7@linux.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 10:55:09 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191025153410.15405-7-gabriel@inconstante.net.br> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 10/25/19 10:33 AM, Gabriel F. T. Gomes wrote: > From: "Gabriel F. T. Gomes" > > No changes since v1. > > -- 8< -- > The format string can request positional parameters, instead of relying > on the order in which they appear as arguments. Since this has an > effect on how the type of each argument is determined, this patch > extends the test cases to use positional parameters with mixed double > and long double types, to verify that the IEEE long double > implementations of *printf work correctly in this scenario. > > Tested for powerpc64le. OK. Are there any other weird cases which should be tested against? Are these meant to be implicit tests of the underlying ABI?