This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA] New tests for 'const' and 'volatile' expressions
- From: Michael Snyder <msnyder at cygnus dot com>
- To: Fernando Nasser <fnasser at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Fernando Nasser <fnasser at cygnus dot com>, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 10:59:27 -0800
- Subject: Re: [RFA] New tests for 'const' and 'volatile' expressions
- Organization: Red Hat
- References: <200111140159.fAE1xoh22447@reddwarf.cygnus.com> <3BF2E7BA.BAF8CB72@cygnus.com> <3BF2FCE7.1237E3AF@cygnus.com> <3BF3E676.FE6A59C3@redhat.com>
Fernando Nasser wrote:
>
> Michael Snyder wrote:
> >
> > Fernando Nasser wrote:
> > >
> > > Michael Snyder wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This is a test that I forgot to submit back in September,
> > > > after submitting the changes to the expression parser that
> > > > permitted more complex expressions involving const and volatile.
> > >
> > > Nice, new tests are good!
> > >
> > > > I've tested the test on several native and embedded targets.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Do they pass?
> >
> > Oh, yes -- no failures, when tested on the main branch.
> > I have not tested the 5.1 branch. If it fails, there would
> > be two choices:
> >
> > * merge the parser patch onto the branch
> > * omit this test from the branch.
> > >
>
> As this is a new feature, it would not make much sense have it
> where the feature was not yet added, right?
>
> So I would say it goes where you previous patch goes, and only there.
>
> I guess you can check it in to the trunk now.
Committed.