[PATCH] [c++] [testsuite] adjust contracts9.C for negative addresses

[PATCH] [c++] [testsuite] adjust contracts9.C for negative addresses

[Alexandre Oliva]

The test expected the address of a literal string, converted to long
long, to yield a positive value.  That expectation doesn't necessarily
hold, and the test fails where it doesn't.

Adjust the test to use a pointer that will compare as expected.

Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu.  Also tested with gcc-13 on arm-,
aarch64-, x86- and x86_64-vxworks7r2.  Ok to install?


for  gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog

	* g++.dg/contracts/contracts9.C: Don't assume string literals
	have non-negative addresses.
---
 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/contracts/contracts9.C |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/contracts/contracts9.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/contracts/contracts9.C
index 09a1a6532c5a0..58b60aca32057 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/contracts/contracts9.C
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/contracts/contracts9.C
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ int main()
 {
   fun1(1, -1);
   fun1(-1, 1.0);
-  fun1(-1, "test");
+  fun1(-1, (const char *)0x1234);
 
   [[ assert: fun1(-1, -5) ]];
   [[ assert: test<int>::fun(10, -6) ]];

-- 
Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker            https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/
   Free Software Activist                   GNU Toolchain Engineer
More tolerance and less prejudice are key for inclusion and diversity
Excluding neuro-others for not behaving ""normal"" is *not* inclusive

Re: [PATCH] [c++] [testsuite] adjust contracts9.C for negative addresses

[Mike Stump]

On Apr 15, 2024, at 8:20 PM, Alexandre Oliva <oliva@adacore.com> wrote:
> 
> The test expected the address of a literal string, converted to long
> long, to yield a positive value.  That expectation doesn't necessarily
> hold, and the test fails where it doesn't.
> 
> Adjust the test to use a pointer that will compare as expected.
> 
> Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu.  Also tested with gcc-13 on arm-,
> aarch64-, x86- and x86_64-vxworks7r2.  Ok to install?

Ok.