From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin@redhat.com>
To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <chastain@cygnus.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA] testsuite/gdb.c++/ref-types.exp: use runto
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 14:23:00 -0000
Message-id: <m2hf0snihn.fsf@dynamic-addr-83-177.resnet.rochester.edu>
References: <200103172035.MAA10416@bosch.cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-03/msg00323.html

Michael Elizabeth Chastain <chastain@cygnus.com> writes:

> Actually, I'm suggesting two things:
> 
> (1) In the gdb test suite, print FAIL when gdb gives a wrong answer.
> 
> (2) In gdb, figure out a cover set for the cases that fail, and
>     don't execute those cases.
>     
> "virtual functions altogether" would certainly cover all the buggy cases,
> but it's too broad.
> 
> Perhaps "virtual functions in for classes where the complete type has
> a virtual base"?
This is still a lot of cases, because of mixin use.

I think I can come up with a better heuristic.
How bout i do a minimal symbol lookup on the address we think the
virtual function is at, and make sure it's the start of some real
function (and if you really want to go a bit further, i'll make sure
it's a function in the class, or it's base classes)

It's going to be exteremely rare that we come up with an address that
happens to match this heuristic, but isn't correct (because we'll
end up not at the start address of a function 99% of the time if we
are wrong).


--Dan
> 
> Michael