[Bug libstdc++/67440] New: pretty-printing of a const set<foo> fails

[Bug libstdc++/67440] New: pretty-printing of a const set<foo> fails

[dje at google dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67440

            Bug ID: 67440
           Summary: pretty-printing of a const set<foo> fails
           Product: gcc
           Version: unknown
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: libstdc++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: dje at google dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

Type lookup in the pretty-printer of const set<foo> fails, set<foo> should be
used instead.

With the attached changes to the testcase, before the attached patch, one sees:

Python Exception <type 'exceptions.ValueError'> Cannot find type const
std::__debug::set<int, std::less<int>, std::allocator<int> >::_Rep_type:

Index: testsuite/libstdc++-prettyprinters/simple.cc
===================================================================
--- testsuite/libstdc++-prettyprinters/simple.cc        (revision 227421)
+++ testsuite/libstdc++-prettyprinters/simple.cc        (working copy)
@@ -73,6 +73,9 @@
   std::map<std::string, int>::iterator mpiter = mp.begin();
 // { dg-final { note-test mpiter {{first = "zardoz", second = 23}} } }

+  const std::set<int> const_intset = {2, 3};
+// { dg-final { note-test const_intset {std::set with 2 elements = {[0] = 2,
[1] = 3}} } }
+
   std::set<std::string> sp;
   sp.insert("clownfish");
   sp.insert("barrel");

[Bug libstdc++/67440] pretty-printing of a const set<foo> fails

[dje at google dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67440

--- Comment #1 from Doug Evans <dje at google dot com> ---
Created attachment 36288
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36288&action=edit
patch + testcase

This could use another set of eyes.

[Bug libstdc++/67440] pretty-printing of a const set<foo> fails

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67440

Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2015-09-03
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
We've had so many problems relating to that find_type function, but the change
looks good (assuming all the existing tests still pass with it :-)

Please post it to gcc-patches@ + libstdc++@ and go ahead and commit it, thanks.