From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1856 invoked by alias); 27 Apr 2010 20:42:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 1848 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Apr 2010 20:42:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Apr 2010 20:42:19 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o3RKgHcl024820 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2010 16:42:18 -0400 Received: from qcore.mollernet.net (vpn-8-212.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.8.212]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o3RKgHRC013486; Tue, 27 Apr 2010 16:42:17 -0400 Message-ID: <4BD74C28.9020107@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 20:42:00 -0000 From: Chris Moller User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090513 Fedora/3.0-2.3.beta2.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Kratochvil CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: pr 11543 using-directive does not autocomplete References: <4BD725BC.2090709@redhat.com> <20100427203207.GA12825@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: <20100427203207.GA12825@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-04/txt/msg00926.txt.bz2 On 04/27/10 16:32, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 19:58:20 +0200, Chris Moller wrote: > >> Attached patch fixes this, but here's a question: Is it possible to >> have multiple name qualifications like "A::B::whatever"? >> > > Yes. > > Unfortunately your patch has a regression even for single-namespace case: > I /thought/ that was too easy. :-) Okay, I'll go hack on it some more, Thanks, Chris > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > namespace A > { > int variableq = 1; > namespace B > { > int variabler = 2; > } > } > int > main (void) > { > return A::variableq + A::B::variabler; > } > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > (gdb) p var > -> > (gdb) p variableq > No symbol "variableq" in current context. > > In this case current FSF GDB HEAD behavior is the only correct one. > > The completion patch must follow the existing / non-existing "using namespace" > directives. The patch must be integrated with `struct using_direct' lists > tracked by Sami Wagiaalla's using_directive infrastructure. > > Thanks for picking this up. > > > Thanks, > Jan >