Regressions problem (200 failures)

[Donn Terry <donnte at microsoft dot com>]

Andrew has asked me to see if there are others affected by this...

On 2/17, the following patch was made to gcc:

> 2000-02-17  Mark Mitchell  <mark@codesourcery.com>
>
>       * function.c (thread_prologue_and_epilogue_insns): Put a line note
>       after the prologue.

It has the effect, in my case at least, of causing gdb to break at the "{"
of many functions when breaking at a function name (5 of 5 main()s that I
tried, but not too many other functions).  (Usually gdb breaks breaks at
the first statement rather than somewhere in the function prologue).
I discussed this with Mark Mitchell, and he concurs that that could be
a side-effect of the patch (whose purpose is to assure that SOME
breakpoint occurs at the beginning of each function).

That, in itself, isn't a problem (except possibly with user perception).
However,
the gdb regressions are written in such a way that they expect to stop at
the
first statement (and often do a single "n", expecting the first statement to
be executed).  This causes well over 200 (mostly cascade) regression
failures.

Andrew asserts that the regressions aren't being too picky in this regard
because
of user expectation.

The problem for me is I suspect that they're BOTH right, but there are
regression
failures unless something happens.

Are there others out there who are seeing this (run the regressions pointing
it at a new gcc)?  (The gcc CVS as of 5:30 or so PST last night still
exhibited the
problem.)  Does anyone have any thougts on how to proceed?

Donn Terry
Speaking, of course, only for myself.