From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15965 invoked by alias); 24 Nov 2003 17:25:47 -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 15958 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2003 17:25:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hawaii.kealia.com) (209.3.10.89) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 24 Nov 2003 17:25:47 -0000 Received: by hawaii.kealia.com (Postfix, from userid 2049) id DD79BC6B6; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 09:25:46 -0800 (PST) To: mec.gnu@mindspring.com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain) Cc: drow@mvista.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch/testsuite/c++] test script for PR c++/186 References: <20031123230016.C6B614B409@berman.michael-chastain.com> From: David Carlton Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:25:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20031123230016.C6B614B409@berman.michael-chastain.com> (Michael Elizabeth Chastain's message of "Sun, 23 Nov 2003 18:00:16 -0500 (EST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Rational FORTRAN, linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00524.txt.bz2 On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 18:00:16 -0500 (EST), mec.gnu@mindspring.com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain) said: > Hmmm, my test would be more clear if I made B::~B write something into > the data fields. I will do that. If we're worried about optimizing compiliers, then I bet this would make the script more fragile. But I suppose that's mostly irrelevant for purposes of the test suite. > I will also add some tests like this: > A alpha; > ... > (gdb) print (B *) α > I think that's actually the heart and these issues with destructors > and scope are peripheral. Yeah, that's a good idea. David Carlton carlton@kealia.com