This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [rfa/testsuite] more tests in gdb.c++/m-static
In article <ro1hehmrfd2.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU>, David Carlton <carlton@math.Stanford.EDU> writes:
> Here are the revised patches for m-static
Whoops: my patch that claims to be for m-static.exp is really a second
copy of the patch for m-static.cc. One more time, with feeling:
David Carlton
carlton@math.stanford.edu
2002-08-22 David Carlton <carlton@math.stanford.edu>
* gdb.c++/m-static.exp: Remove breakpoints depending on line
numbers, and replace them by use of "next" or relative
breakpoints.
Add test 4.
* gdb.c++/m-static.cc: Add test 4.
* gdb.c++/m-static.h: New file.
* gdb.c++/m-static1.cc: New file.
Index: m-static.exp
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.c++/m-static.exp,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -p -r1.1 m-static.exp
--- m-static.exp 30 May 2002 19:09:47 -0000 1.1
+++ m-static.exp 22 Aug 2002 17:15:03 -0000
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
# Tests for member static data
# 2002-05-13 Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz@redhat.com>
+# 2002-08-22 David Carlton <carlton@math.stanford.edu>
# This file is part of the gdb testsuite
@@ -33,9 +34,10 @@ set bug_id 0
set testfile "m-static"
set srcfile ${testfile}.cc
+set srcfile1 ${testfile}1.cc
set binfile ${objdir}/${subdir}/${testfile}
-if { [gdb_compile "${srcdir}/${subdir}/${srcfile}" "${binfile}" executable {debug c++}] != "" } {
+if { [gdb_compile "${srcdir}/${subdir}/${srcfile} ${srcdir}/${subdir}/${srcfile1}" "${binfile}" executable {debug c++}] != "" } {
gdb_suppress_entire_file "Testcase compile failed, so all tests in this file will automatically fail."
}
@@ -55,8 +57,7 @@ if ![runto_main] then {
}
# One.
-gdb_test "break 68" "Breakpoint \[0-9\]*.*line 68\\."
-gdb_test "continue" "Continuing\\.\r\n\r\nBreakpoint.*at.*m-static\\.cc:68\r\n.*" "continue to 68"
+gdb_test "next" "" "next"
# simple object, static const bool
gdb_test "print test1.test" "\\$\[0-9\]* = true" "simple object, static const bool"
@@ -71,8 +72,7 @@ gdb_test "print test1.key2" "\\$\[0-9\]*
gdb_test "print test1.value" "\\$\[0-9\]* = oriental" "simple object, static enum"
# Two.
-gdb_test "break 69" "Breakpoint \[0-9\]*.*line 69\\."
-gdb_test "continue" "Continuing\\.\r\n\r\nBreakpoint.*at.*m-static\\.cc:69\r\n.*" "continue to 69"
+gdb_test "next" "" "next"
# derived template object, base static const bool
gdb_test "print test2.test" "\\$\[0-9\]* = true" "derived template object, base static const bool"
@@ -90,8 +90,11 @@ gdb_test "print test2.value" "\\$\[0-9\]
gdb_test "print test2.value_derived" "\\$\[0-9\].* = etruscan" "derived template object, static enum"
# Three.
-gdb_test "break 71" "Breakpoint \[0-9\]*.*line 71\\."
-gdb_test "continue" "Continuing\\.\r\n\r\nBreakpoint.*at.*m-static\\.cc:71\r\n.*" "continue to 71"
+
+# With the compiler that I'm using, execution won't stop at the test4
+# initializer. This seems the most robust way to handle that.
+gdb_breakpoint "+2"
+gdb_continue_to_breakpoint "end of initializers"
# template object, static derived template data member's base static const bool
gdb_test "print test3.data.test" "\\$\[0-9\].* = true" "template object, static const bool"
@@ -107,6 +110,22 @@ gdb_test "print test3.data.value" "\\$\[
# template object, static derived template data member's static enum
gdb_test "print test3.data.value_derived" "\\$\[0-9\].* = etruscan" "template object, static derived enum"
+
+# 2002-08-16
+# Four.
+
+# No next: see test3 comment.
+
+# static const int initialized in another file.
+gdb_test "print test4.elsewhere" "\\$\[0-9\].* = 221" "static const int initialized elsewhere"
+
+# static const int that nobody initializes. From PR gdb/635.
+gdb_test "print test4.nowhere" "field nowhere is nonexistent or has been optimised out" "static const int initialized nowhere"
+
+# Perhaps at some point test4 should also include a test for a static
+# const int that was initialized in the header file. But I'm not sure
+# that GDB's current behavior in such situations is either consistent
+# across platforms or optimal, so I'm not including one now.
gdb_exit
return 0
Index: m-static.cc
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.c++/m-static.cc,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -p -r1.1 m-static.cc
--- m-static.cc 30 May 2002 19:09:47 -0000 1.1
+++ m-static.cc 22 Aug 2002 17:12:20 -0000
@@ -53,6 +53,10 @@ namespace __gnu_test
template<typename T>
gnu_obj_2<int> gnu_obj_3<T>::data(etruscan);
+
+ // 2002-08-16
+ // Test four.
+#include "m-static.h"
}
// instantiate templates explicitly so their static members will exist
@@ -67,6 +71,7 @@ int main()
gnu_obj_1 test1(egyptian, 4589);
gnu_obj_2<long> test2(roman);
gnu_obj_3<long> test3(greek);
+ gnu_obj_4 test4;
return 0;
}
--- /dev/null Thu Apr 11 07:25:15 2002
+++ m-static.h Fri Aug 16 13:24:37 2002
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+// 2002-08-16
+
+class gnu_obj_4
+{
+ public:
+ static const int elsewhere;
+ static const int nowhere;
+ // At some point, perhaps:
+ // static const int everywhere = 317;
+};
+
--- /dev/null Thu Apr 11 07:25:15 2002
+++ m-static1.cc Fri Aug 16 13:11:02 2002
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+// 2002-08-16
+
+namespace __gnu_test {
+#include "m-static.h"
+}
+
+using namespace __gnu_test;
+
+const int gnu_obj_4::elsewhere = 221;