[RFA 0/3] Fix pascal behavior for class fields with testcase

["Pierre Muller" <pierre.muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr>]

 I finally started to try git format-patch.

  The three patch emails that will follow contain:

1) The fix in p-exp.y to cope correctly with this fields

2) New options for pascal compilation in the testsuite

3) A testcase for PR pascal/17815

I hope this is correct...
but there are surely some formatting and
name conventions that I do not follow correctly...


Pierre Muller

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-patches-
> owner@sourceware.org] De la part de Pedro Alves
> Envoyé : vendredi 9 janvier 2015 11:52
> À : Pierre Muller; 'gdb-patches'
> Cc : gpc@gnu.de
> Objet : Re: gdb-patches RFA: Fix pascal behavior for class fields
> 
> On 01/08/2015 02:15 PM, Pierre Muller wrote:
> > For gpc mailing list:
> > this email comes as a follow-up of this bug report
> > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17815
> >
> > The start of the thread can be found at:
> > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-01/msg00164.html
> >
> > Pedro asked:
> >>>> How about adding this to the test suite?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>   The whole testsuite/gdb.pascal is almost empty,
> >>> I never invested time to develop it :(
> >>>
> >>>   At the time I started it, GPC (the GNU pascal compiler)
> >>> was still active, but development apparently
> >>> stopped since quite some time.
> >>>
> >>>   I am unable to install GPC, which means that I cannot test it.
> >>> Would a testsuite that supports only Free Pascal be acceptable?
> >>
> >> Do you actually mean, whether it's ok for a new
> >> test (not test suite) to go in untested on GPC?  It certainly is.
> >> Better test on FPC than nowhere.  :-)
> >   That is indeed what I meant.
> >
> >> AFAICS, the tests themselves don't really care which compiler
> >> is in use other than for marking xfails; you just call
> >> gdb_compile_pascal,
> >> and that works with either.  That's my impression from quickly
> >> skimming testsuite/lib/pascal.exp.
> >
> >   The problem is that GPC and Free Pascal support several
> > pascal 'dialects'. But this requires command line options.
> >
> >   The -Mobjfpc option is required for Free Pascal compiler
> > to understand class type definition, but is rejected in default mode.
> >
> >   I expect GNU GPC to also reject class in 'normal' mode...
> > Maybe someone on the gpc mailing list knows if classes are supported
> > by GPC and if it requires a special compiler option.
> 
> I'd suggest adding support for a new option to
> gdb_compile_pascal, like "objfpc", so you'd compile
> the test with:
> 
>  if {[gdb_compile_pascal ... executable [list debug objfpc]] != "" } {
>      untested $testfile.exp
>      return -1
>  }
> 
> You'd teach fpc_compile about the new option:
> 
> proc fpc_compile {source dest type options} {
> ...
>     foreach i $options {
> ...
>         } elseif { $i == "objfpc" } {
>            append add_flags " -Mobjfpc"
>         }
> ...
>     }
> 
> 
> Someone that cares about testing with GNU GPC would then
> do the equivalent to gpc_compile, if anything is necessary.
> If gpc simply fails to compile the test, it's no biggie,
> as gdb_compile_pascal returns false, and the test is
> skipped with "untested".
> 
> There may be a more generic and common name for the mode,
> like "obj-pascal" or something, but I wouldn't know.
> 
> Thanks,
> Pedro Alves