Re: [RFA/c++testsuite] New test for constructor breakpoints

[Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec at shout dot net>]

Hi Daniel,

> The patch tests _overloaded_ constructors.

Ah, you are right.  I saw the choice menu and jumped to an incorrect
conclusion about what you were doing.  I'll revisit the patch.

> The bug, however, is with
> _cloned_ constructors.  Not the same thing at all.  Cloned constructors
> are not user-visible objects; they only differ in that they use
> different offsets into the object based on whether it is a baseclass or
> the principal object.

But the cloned constructor is visible.  For instance, suppose Foo is
a virtual base class, and suppose Foo::Foo calls other functions,
and suppose that I set a breakpoint on another function.  Then the
not-in-charge version of Foo::Foo is on the stack and it is going to
appear to the user with *some* name.

I would like to show this as Foo::Foo$nic, and I would like the user to
be able to set breakpoints on either Foo::Foo or Foo::Foo$nic or both,
as they see fit.

Michael C