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

[Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@shout.net>]

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.

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.  :(

Michael C