From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12423 invoked by alias); 2 Jul 2003 20:47:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 12415 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2003 20:47:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Jul 2003 20:47:27 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h62KlQH26176 for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 16:47:26 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h62KlQI15031; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 16:47:26 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn50-30.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.30]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h62KlPE20620; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 16:47:25 -0400 Received: (from kev@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h62KlKe02660; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:47:20 -0700 Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 20:47:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner Message-Id: <1030702204719.ZM2659@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: David Carlton "Re: [patch/testsuite] gdb.c++/classes.exp: add another ptype pattern" (Jul 2, 12:19pm) References: <200307021649.h62GnKLW026005@duracef.shout.net> <20030702183257.GA8828@nevyn.them.org> <1030702190233.ZM2148@localhost.localdomain> To: David Carlton , Kevin Buettner Subject: Re: [patch/testsuite] gdb.c++/classes.exp: add another ptype pattern Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , Michael Elizabeth Chastain , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-07/txt/msg00058.txt.bz2 On Jul 2, 12:19pm, David Carlton wrote: > On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 12:02:33 -0700, Kevin Buettner said: > > > See > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-05/msg01715.html > > > (where I explain the motivation behind this change). > > Ah, thanks. That seems like a reasonable change, then. > > Does this give fully-qualified names for types defined in namespaces, > too? I don't think so, but I'm really not sure. My recollection is that an early version of the patch did this, but I was convinced to remove the namespace bit of it. I'm not sure why any more. I've been hunting around for the original patch that supported namespaces. (It won't appear in any mailing lists external to Red Hat.) I've found one that predates the one that finally got committed, but I can't see why one of these would support namespaces and the other not. I guess the answer is, "Try it and let me know..." Kevin