2003-08-22 Michael Chastain <mec@shout.net>

	* gdb.cp: New directory.
	* gdb.cp/*: Copy from gdb.c++/*.
	* gdb.c++/*: Remove.
	* Makefile.in: Change gdb.c++ to gdb.cp.
	* configure.in:  Ditto.
	* configure: Regnerate.

1 files changed, 127 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/rtti.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/rtti.exp
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..f99637a28a9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/rtti.exp
@@ -0,0 +1,127 @@
+# Copyright 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+
+# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
+# it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
+# the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
+# (at your option) any later version.
+# 
+# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
+# GNU General Public License for more details.
+# 
+# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
+# along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
+# Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA.  
+
+# This file is part of the gdb testsuite.
+
+# This contains tests for GDB's use of RTTI information.  This stems
+# from a bug reported in PR gdb/488 and other places, which leads to
+# statements like 'warning: can't find class named 'C::D', as given by
+# C++ RTTI'.  It arises from GDB not knowing about classes that are
+# defined in namespaces.
+
+# NOTE: carlton/2003-05-16: I suspect it could arise from nested class
+# issues, too, and even once we fix that, there might be situations
+# (involving templates, in particular) where this problem triggers
+# because GDB and GCC have different ideas what a class is called.
+
+if $tracelevel then {
+        strace $tracelevel
+        }
+
+if { [skip_cplus_tests] } { continue }
+
+#
+# test running programs
+#
+set prms_id 0
+set bug_id 0
+
+set testfile "rtti"
+set srcfile1 "${srcdir}/${subdir}/${testfile}1.cc"
+set objfile1 "${objdir}/${subdir}/${testfile}1.o"
+set srcfile2 "${srcdir}/${subdir}/${testfile}2.cc"
+set objfile2 "${objdir}/${subdir}/${testfile}2.o"
+set binfile ${objdir}/${subdir}/${testfile}
+
+# gdb_get_line_number needs this to be called srcfile.
+set srcfile "${srcfile1}"
+
+if  { [gdb_compile "${srcfile1}" "${objfile1}" object {debug c++}] != "" } {
+     gdb_suppress_entire_file "Testcase compile failed, so all tests in this file will automatically fail."
+}
+
+if  { [gdb_compile "${srcfile2}" "${objfile2}" object {debug c++}] != "" } {
+     gdb_suppress_entire_file "Testcase compile failed, so all tests in this file will automatically fail."
+}
+
+if  { [gdb_compile "${objfile1} ${objfile2}" "${binfile}" executable {debug c++}] != "" } {
+     gdb_suppress_entire_file "Testcase compile failed, so all tests in this file will automatically fail."
+}
+
+if [get_compiler_info ${binfile} "c++"] {
+    return -1
+}
+
+gdb_exit
+gdb_start
+gdb_reinitialize_dir $srcdir/$subdir
+gdb_load ${binfile}
+
+
+if ![runto_main] then {
+    perror "couldn't run to breakpoint"
+    continue
+}
+
+# First, run to after we've constructed the object:
+
+gdb_breakpoint [gdb_get_line_number "constructs-done"]
+gdb_continue_to_breakpoint "end of constructors"
+
+gdb_test_multiple "print *e1" "print *e1" {
+    -re "warning: can't find class named `n1::D1', as given by C\\+\\+ RTTI.*$gdb_prompt $" {
+	kfail "gdb/488" "print *e1"
+    }
+    -re "\\$\[0-9\]* = {<n1::Base1> = .*}\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
+	pass "print *e1"
+    }
+    -re "\\$\[0-9\]* = {<Base1> = .*}\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
+	# NOTE: carlton/2003-05-16: If code is compiled by GCC2, we
+	# don't print the warning (for no particular reason), but we
+	# still call the class via the wrong name; PR gdb/57 is our
+	# catch-all PR for nested type problems.
+	kfail "gdb/57" "print *e1"
+    }
+}
+
+# NOTE: carlton/2003-05-16: This test fails on my branch with an
+# "<incomplete type>" message because, within rtt1.cc, GDB has no way
+# of knowing that the class is called 'n2::D2' instead of just 'D2'.
+# This is an artifical test case, though: if we were using these
+# classes in a more substantial way, G++ would emit more debug info.
+# As is, I don't think there's anything that GDB can do about this
+# case until G++ starts emitting DW_TAG_namespace info; when that part
+# of the branch gets merged in, then we'll probably want to convert
+# that fail branch to an xfail.
+
+gdb_test_multiple "print *e2" "print *e2" {
+    -re "warning: can't find class named `n2::D2', as given by C\\+\\+ RTTI.*$gdb_prompt $" {
+	kfail "gdb/488" "print *e2"
+    }
+    -re "\\$\[0-9\]* = <incomplete type>\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
+	# See above NOTE.
+	fail "print *e2"
+    }
+    -re "\\$\[0-9\]* = {<n2::Base2> = .*}\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
+	pass "print *e2"
+    }
+    -re "\\$\[0-9\]* = {<Base2> = .*}\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
+	kfail "gdb/57" "print *e2"
+    }
+}
+
+gdb_exit
+return 0