Joel Brobecker writes:
> Hello,
>
> This is a followup on the thread that started with:
>
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2004-02/msg00058.html
>
> The test proposed under that thread was dropped because an empty
> struct is not legal C. However, it is legal in Ada, and I've seen
> a message saying that it is also legal in C++.
>
Let's try the Vulcan mind meld: "We need a gdb.ada directory. We need
a gdb.ada directory. We need a gdb.ada directory. We need a gdb.ada
directory." :-)
Seriously, I'd like to see a testcase that FAIL->PASS with this patch.
Can somebody get a C++ testcase, at least?
the patch looks sensible, but I would like to see the testcase go in
at the same time, or we'll forget.