[RFC] const qualifiers in gdb.c++/method.exp
Daniel Jacobowitz
drow@mvista.com
Thu Jan 10 11:59:00 GMT 2002
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 09:07:18AM -0600, Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz writes:
> > First of all, as best as I can tell, GCC simply doesn't support the
> > stabs extensions for const and volatile. Rather than accepting this,
> > we should detect it and mark them XFAILS. I would prefer to XFAIL
> > based on debug info type and compiler rather than on result - if we lose the
> > DWARF-2 const tag in a bug some day, it should start FAILing, not
> > XFAILing!
>
> I would prefer to FAIL rather than XFAIL. However, I accept XFAIL in
> this situation, because the bug does not hurt users very much and our
> chances of getting the compiler fixed are low.
Not that low; it's pretty simplistic.
> setup_xfail_format is the function to use here. See gdb.c++/templates.exp
> for an example. Note that the caller must call get_debug_format first.
>
> mec> "A * const"
> mec> native i686-pc-linux-gnu, gcc 3.0.2, -gdwarf-2
> mec> native i686-pc-linux-gnu, gcc HEAD, -gdwarf-2
> mec> native i686-pc-linux-gnu, gcc gcc-3_0-branch, -gdwarf-2
> mec>
> mec> "const A * const"
> mec> native i686-pc-linux-gnu, gcc 2.95.3, -gdwarf-2
> mec>
> mec> The first seven of these are wrong. The type needs to have a "const A *"
> mec> in it, rather than an "A *".
>
> drow> That we lost this const is very interesting. It is present in the
> drow> dwarf-2 information without a doubt. What version of GDB are you
> drow> actually using to test this?
>
> This is a recent CVS pull of gdb HEAD:
>
> Checkout begin: Sat Dec 22 18:12:43 PST 2001
> Checkout end: Sat Dec 22 20:08:47 PST 2001
>
> Hmmm, that's not all that recent. :(
Mind trying again? I think Fred fixed these - or someone else did...
--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list