sdt-types tests

[Stan Cox]

On 11/22/2010 10:01 PM, Roland McGrath wrote:


> for C: c89 c99 gnu99
> for C++ (i.e. with -xc++): c++98 gnu++98 c++0x gnu++0x
> each of those both with and without -pedantic.
> -ansi in C is the same as -std=c89.
> -ansi in C++ is the same as -std=c++98.
> So it's probably better just to use all those -std= variants and not -ansi.

I lifted that option list verbatim from sdt.exp.  I'll change both sdt.exp and 
sdt_misc.exp to use this refined list.

> That produced no regressions, but since the problematic case didn't fail
> before,

Hmm,  it has always tried to catch a failing compile via:
  set res [target_compile...if { $res != "" } {

> We also need to test all this on some older compilers, like the RHEL5
> compiler, and on machines other than x86.  I've only tried F13/x86-64.

I have an at job that tests on ppc.  I'll try RHEL5 here at RDU.

> There's another new wrinkle for the translator/runtime that I forgot to
> mention.

The register variants are recognized but nothing further is done; I'll add that.