From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22980 invoked by alias); 8 Apr 2002 18:43:24 -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 22957 invoked from network); 8 Apr 2002 18:43:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Apr 2002 18:43:23 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 16ue6v-00009i-00; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 14:43:25 -0400 Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 11:43:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb.c++/method.exp Message-ID: <20020408144325.A495@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200204081717.g38HHO701077@duracef.shout.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200204081717.g38HHO701077@duracef.shout.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00313.txt.bz2 On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 12:17:24PM -0500, Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote: > Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > > Does anything currently produce A const * const? It's probably > > legal... > > I haven't seen any "A const * const". I guess I would have to accommodate > that if somebody saw one. I'm not inclined to put it in at this time. Agree. > Here's what I've got (2002-04-04, native i686-pc-linux-gnu): > > const A * const > gcc 2.95.3 -gdwarf-2 > gcc 2.96-rh -gdwarf-2 > gcc 3.0.4 -gdwarf-2 > gcc gcc-3_1-branch -gdwarf-2 > gcc HEAD -gdwarf-2 Legitimate. > A * > gcc 2.95.3 -gstabs+ > gcc 2.96-rh -gstabs+ > gcc 3.0.4 -gstabs+ XFAIL. > const class {...} * const > gcc gcc-3_1-branch -gstabs+ > gcc HEAD -gstabs+ Broken. > "const class {...} * const" looks like a gdb bug to me. Again I will > look in the generated code. That will likely be a FAIL with a bug > report (soon to be a KFAIL). There is a PR for this, though it isn't obvious. It's... uhm.... gdb/277. I even describe the solution. I'm too busy to do it this week, but hopefully soon. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer