Re: [PATCH 2/3] gdb: Improve output from "info types" commad

[Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>]

On 7/19/19 8:43 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote:
> * Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> [2019-07-18 21:07:10 +0100]:
> 
>> On 7/12/19 12:37 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote:

>> I'm not immediately seeing what the C++ testcase is trying to
>> test.  If you replace "class" with struct, and use "typedef struct AA"
>> instead of "typedef AA", isn't that code basically C code as well?
>>
>> Also, might it be a good idea to check the info-types.c stuff in
>> C++ mode as well, to make sure we normalize C and C++ modes?
>> I.e., make gdb.base/info-types.exp compile once as a C program, and
>> once as a C++ program?
> 
> I've removed the gdb.cp/info-types.{cc,exp} files, and extended the
> gdb.base test to include an example of 'class'.

Ah, OK, it's "class" specifically that you were looking at test.
I wasn't sure.

> Yes, we know
> internally they are handled just like structs, but I'd like to cover
> it "just in case".  The gdb.base case is now compiled as C and C++.

Thanks.

Pedro Alves