Re: [RFA] Fix an error in value_change_enclosing_type

[Pierre Muller <muller at ics dot u-strasbg dot fr>]

At 01:05 04/11/2002, Elena Zannoni wrote:
>Pierre Muller writes:
> > A 22:39 22/10/2002, Elena Zannoni a écrit :
> > >muller@cerbere.u-strasbg.fr writes:
> > > > At 17:05 18/10/2002 -0400, Elena Zannoni wrote:
> > > > >Pierre Muller writes:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > the function value_change_enclosing_type
> > > > > > does not set the enlclosing_type field correctly if
> > > > > > the new_encl_type has a bigger length that the value type.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Its seems quite astonishing that this has not been noticed before, 
> > > > > > but I discovered it when trying to get 
> > > > > > the fpc-abi.c code to work correctly.
> > > > > > 
> > > > >
> > > > >The fix seems OK. However, do you have a small testcase? It would be
> > > > >good to add it to the testsuite.
> > > > Sorry, but I don't have any, because I really don't even know
> > > > if this code is ever executed for C code. It is for
> > > > Free Pascal generated code, that is how I discovered that bug.
> > > > But I can't add tests with Free Pascal anyhow.
> > > > 
> > >
> > >Oh, ok.
> > >
> > > > >Does this fix changes the results for the already existing tests?
> > > > 
> > > > Sorry, but I never worked with the testsuite,
> > > > so I can't answer this question.
> > > > 
> > >
> > >Could you run make check in your gdb/testsuite directory in the build
> > >tree?  All I meant is, whether or not the test results are different
> > >before and after your change.
> > >
> > >thanks
> > >Elena
> > 
> > 
> > I tried to create a test program
> > using C++ code, but it does never seem to
> > use the code that I modified...
> > 
> > Thus, as I expected, the testsuite is unchanged:
> > 
> > Tested on a i386 linux  box:
> > (note that pthreads libs is not installed on that machine,
> > which creates several failures)
> > cvs tree from 29/10/2002:
> > 
>
>There is on more pass with your patch, looks like. Which test passed?
>It could be a transient failure.

As explained below:
 > But  the only difference is between gdbcvs.sum and modgdb.sum
> > is 
> > 5166c5166
> > < FAIL: gdb.c++/annota2.exp: annotate-quit
> > ---
> > > PASS: gdb.c++/annota2.exp: annotate-quit
> > 
> > which, when you look into gdb.c++/annota2.exp 
> > is said to be a tests that fails sometimes, but unreproducably.
> > 
> > So I think that we can consider that the 
> > testsuite result is unchanged.


>Otherwise, ok.
>
>Elena

Thanks,
I commited the patch today, I just change the date in the ChangeLog...