Re: [patch, testsuite] Tests to _Complex type

[Yao Qi <yao at codesourcery dot com>]

On 05/06/2011 10:33 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> It would be good to include a much wider range of tests.  structs and 
> unions containing complex values (and arrays of complex values, and 
> complex values mixed with real ones, etc.), complex values in many 
> different argument positions, and after integer arguments as well as 
> floating-point ones, all three types _Complex float, _Complex double, 
> _Complex long double properly covered in these ways.  For structs and 
> unions and arrays therein, the sort of case you want to cover includes the 
> ARM (VFP ABI) and IA64 rules on homogeneous aggregates.

Yes, I agree.  After go through gdb testsuite, we may do several tests
for _Complex in these following areas,
1. pass and return _Complex type and _Complex type in aggregate type in
function call, like funcargs.exp and callfuncs.exp.
2. vararg for _Complex type and _Complex type in aggregate type, like
varargs.exp
3. _Complex type in struct, like struct.exp.

GDB maintainers,
Shall we propagate _Complex related tests to each *.exp file, such as
funcargs.exp/callfuncs.exp/varargs.exp/struct.arg? or keep all _Complex
tests in a single exp file complex.exp?  I prefer the former one, but I
am afraid this will break some platforms which don't support _Complex.
Thoughts?

-- 
Yao (éå)