From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-14088-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 14781 invoked by alias); 8 Apr 2002 17:17:35 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.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 14769 invoked from network); 8 Apr 2002 17:17:32 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO duracef.shout.net) (204.253.184.12)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Apr 2002 17:17:32 -0000
Received: (from mec@localhost)
	by duracef.shout.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g38HHO701077;
	Mon, 8 Apr 2002 12:17:24 -0500
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 10:17:00 -0000
From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@shout.net>
Message-Id: <200204081717.g38HHO701077@duracef.shout.net>
To: drow@mvista.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb.c++/method.exp
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00309.txt.bz2

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.

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

  A *
    gcc 2.95.3 -gstabs+
    gcc 2.96-rh -gstabs+
    gcc 3.0.4 -gstabs+

  const class {...} * const
    gcc gcc-3_1-branch -gstabs+
    gcc HEAD -gstabs+

"const A * const" should always be a PASS.

"A *" should be a FAIL or an XFAIL, depending on what is in the
generated code.  If gcc is omitting the const then it's an XFAIL.
I will grub around in the generated code to figure that out.

"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).

Michael C