From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11105 invoked by alias); 18 Jun 2004 20:33:09 -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 11096 invoked from network); 18 Jun 2004 20:33:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 18 Jun 2004 20:33:08 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1BbQ2q-00085R-5N; Fri, 18 Jun 2004 16:33:04 -0400 Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 20:33:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: cagney@gnu.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, jimb@redhat.com, keiths@redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: patch to fix gdb/1680 Message-ID: <20040618203304.GA30844@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain , cagney@gnu.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, jimb@redhat.com, keiths@redhat.com References: <20040618202524.608064B104@berman.michael-chastain.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040618202524.608064B104@berman.michael-chastain.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-SW-Source: 2004-06/txt/msg00446.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 04:25:24PM -0400, Michael Chastain wrote: > drow> I prefer to solve the mystery instead. > > We can do both. I don't want to have 16 ERROR's in my face while > we are figuring this out. > > drow> Presumably this version of TCL does not put special meaning on > drow> {string}, but does on {NUMBER}, as has become fashionable for regex > drow> engines. > > Aw, foo! That's what's different about gdb.cp/*.exp. All the examples > in gdb.cp/*.exp are like: > > { x = 100, y = 101 } > > Both the sourceware version of TCL (which is based on 8.4.1) and > the version I use of TCL (8.4.6) have code for {NUMBER} and > {NUMBER, NUMBER} modifiers. > > I suspect there's some difference happening at the expect level > (5.26 versus 5.41). > > Time to dive into the TCL source and throw in some fprintf's and stuff. The correct change is to use { \{ } } or " \\{ } "; it is harmless but still incorrect where we use "\{ }" or "{ }" in the C++ testsuite. I imagine it depends on the guts of the regex matcher whether " { 2, 0, 4 }" throws an error. -- Daniel Jacobowitz