This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: C++/Java regressions
- From: David Carlton <carlton at kealia dot com>
- To: mec dot gnu at mindspring dot com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain)
- Cc: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 09:14:31 -0800
- Subject: Re: C++/Java regressions
- References: <20031125170632.D8D974B409@berman.michael-chastain.com>
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 12:06:32 -0500 (EST), mec.gnu@mindspring.com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain) said:
> I asked:
mec> What is the correct output when a breakpoint is taken on
mec> "A::bar(int) const" ?
Probably my first choice would be A::bar(int) const, and my second
choice would be A::bar. A::bar const seems a bit weird to me. Having
said that:
> After some deliberation, I decided that I want the test script
> to be liberal in what it accepts.
...
> If someone wants to spend time on making gdb's output better here,
> that is okay with me. But I decided that it's too low priority for
> my attention and the list bandwidth.
> David C is that okay with you?
Yes, that's fine with me. What is important is that the breakpoint be
set on the correct method, and that the continue reach the correct
breakpoint. That is in fact happening; I don't really see the point
of having a failing test there, or even a kfailing test.
David Carlton
carlton@kealia.com