From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-10802-listarch-gdb=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 18130 invoked by alias); 16 Oct 2002 18:46:16 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 18114 invoked from network); 16 Oct 2002 18:46:08 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO jackfruit.Stanford.EDU) (171.64.38.136)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Oct 2002 18:46:08 -0000
Received: (from carlton@localhost)
	by jackfruit.Stanford.EDU (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g9GIk1J24814;
	Wed, 16 Oct 2002 11:46:01 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: jackfruit.Stanford.EDU: carlton set sender to carlton@math.stanford.edu using -f
To: Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>
Cc: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>, gdb <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: current namespace game plan
References: <ro165whq33n.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU>
	<m3bs69obav.fsf@savonarola.red-bean.com>
	<ro1it0em6ch.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU>
	<15789.43864.432576.737958@localhost.redhat.com>
From: David Carlton <carlton@math.stanford.edu>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 11:46:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <15789.43864.432576.737958@localhost.redhat.com>
Message-ID: <ro1vg42b4t3.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00126.txt.bz2

On Wed, 16 Oct 2002 14:09:28 -0400, Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com> said:

> Could you start writing some test files with these examples? Even if
> the tests are not passing, I find it is really useful while working on
> something, to monitor my own progress. You could put these tests on
> the branch(es), so that anybody can look at them. Or we could even add
> them to mainline with KFAILs.

Good idea.  I've added some tests to namespace.exp in
carlton_dictionary-branch that demonstrate the cases that that branch
is currently handling more-or-less correctly.  (Which, right now, is
anonymous namespaces and functions defined in a namespace, though
it doesn't handle either case _quite_ correctly yet.)

But I like your idea of adding a whole bunch of tests, even including
ones that I know won't be handled correctly, and marking them to fail.
I'll do that next.

David Carlton
carlton@math.stanford.edu