From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-10551-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 28526 invoked by alias); 14 Nov 2001 03:54:13 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 28505 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 03:54:09 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO duracef.shout.net) (204.253.184.12)
  by sourceware.cygnus.com with SMTP; 14 Nov 2001 03:54:09 -0000
Received: (from mec@localhost)
	by duracef.shout.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) id VAA24497;
	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:54:08 -0600
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 20:31:00 -0000
From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@shout.net>
Message-Id: <200111140354.VAA24497@duracef.shout.net>
To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, msnyder@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: [RFA] New tests for 'const' and 'volatile' expressions
Cc: fnasser@redhat.com
X-SW-Source: 2001-11/txt/msg00047.txt.bz2

It goes down smoothly with my flock of compilers (gcc 2.95.3, gcc 3.0.2,
gcc gcc-3_0-branch, gcc HEAD).   And when I run it on the 5.1 branch,
it does its job and gives FAILs.  I think it's nifty.

Michael C