From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-10977-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 32436 invoked by alias); 3 Dec 2001 18:58:52 -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 32415 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 18:58:49 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.230.5)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Dec 2001 18:58:49 -0000
Received: from cygnus.com (taarna.cygnus.com [205.180.230.102])
	by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15434;
	Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:58:24 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <3C0BCB8F.C2BF7925@cygnus.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 10:58:00 -0000
From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@cygnus.com>
Organization: Red Hat
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Fernando Nasser <fnasser@redhat.com>
CC: Fernando Nasser <fnasser@cygnus.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA] New tests for 'const' and 'volatile' expressions
References: <200111140159.fAE1xoh22447@reddwarf.cygnus.com> <3BF2E7BA.BAF8CB72@cygnus.com> <3BF2FCE7.1237E3AF@cygnus.com> <3BF3E676.FE6A59C3@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2001-12/txt/msg00044.txt.bz2

Fernando Nasser wrote:
> 
> Michael Snyder wrote:
> >
> > Fernando Nasser wrote:
> > >
> > > Michael Snyder wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This is a test that I forgot to submit back in September,
> > > > after submitting the changes to the expression parser that
> > > > permitted more complex expressions involving const and volatile.
> > >
> > > Nice, new tests are good!
> > >
> > > > I've tested the test on several native and embedded targets.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Do they pass?
> >
> > Oh, yes -- no failures, when tested on the main branch.
> > I have not tested the 5.1 branch.  If it fails, there would
> > be two choices:
> >
> >   * merge the parser patch onto the branch
> >   * omit this test from the branch.
> > >
> 
> As this is a new feature, it would not make much sense have it
> where the feature was not yet added, right?
> 
> So I would say it goes where you previous patch goes, and only there.
> 
> I guess you can check it in to the trunk now.

Committed.