Re: [RFC] const qualifiers in gdb.c++/method.exp

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>]

On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 09:07:18AM -0600, Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz writes:
> > First of all, as best as I can tell, GCC simply doesn't support the
> > stabs extensions for const and volatile.  Rather than accepting this,
> > we should detect it and mark them XFAILS.  I would prefer to XFAIL
> > based on debug info type and compiler rather than on result - if we lose the
> > DWARF-2 const tag in a bug some day, it should start FAILing, not
> > XFAILing!
> 
> I would prefer to FAIL rather than XFAIL.  However, I accept XFAIL in
> this situation, because the bug does not hurt users very much and our
> chances of getting the compiler fixed are low.

Not that low; it's pretty simplistic.

> setup_xfail_format is the function to use here.  See gdb.c++/templates.exp
> for an example.  Note that the caller must call get_debug_format first.
> 
> mec>   "A * const"
> mec>     native i686-pc-linux-gnu, gcc 3.0.2,          -gdwarf-2
> mec>     native i686-pc-linux-gnu, gcc HEAD,           -gdwarf-2
> mec>     native i686-pc-linux-gnu, gcc gcc-3_0-branch, -gdwarf-2
> mec> 
> mec>   "const A * const"
> mec>     native i686-pc-linux-gnu, gcc 2.95.3,         -gdwarf-2
> mec> 
> mec> The first seven of these are wrong.  The type needs to have a "const A *"
> mec> in it, rather than an "A *".
> 
> drow> That we lost this const is very interesting.  It is present in the
> drow> dwarf-2 information without a doubt.  What version of GDB are you
> drow> actually using to test this?
> 
> This is a recent CVS pull of gdb HEAD:
> 
>   Checkout begin:  Sat Dec 22 18:12:43 PST 2001
>   Checkout end:    Sat Dec 22 20:08:47 PST 2001
> 
> Hmmm, that's not all that recent.  :(

Mind trying again?  I think Fred fixed these - or someone else did...

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz                           Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer