From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 509 invoked by alias); 23 Aug 2010 18:55:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 499 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Aug 2010 18:55:08 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 18:55:02 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o7NIstX4015413 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 23 Aug 2010 14:54:55 -0400 Received: from host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o7NIsqZS018276 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 23 Aug 2010 14:54:54 -0400 Received: from host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o7NIsqUs003752; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 20:54:52 +0200 Received: (from jkratoch@localhost) by host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id o7NIspmS003751; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 20:54:51 +0200 Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 18:55:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Doug Evans Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" , Andreas Schwab , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] Fix new FAIL `reject p 0x1.1' [fixup] Message-ID: <20100823185451.GA3512@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> References: <20100817003114.087EA84B8F@ruffy.mtv.corp.google.com> <20100820073430.GA28054@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20100820073703.GA19257@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-08/txt/msg00393.txt.bz2 On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 17:35:07 +0200, Doug Evans wrote: > On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 4:58 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Aug 2010, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > >> On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 09:34:30 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > >> 0x1.1 is a perfectly valid hexadecimal floating point.  The new testcase: > > > > It's not valid in C source code (a binary exponent is required), though it > > is valid as input to strtod (like INF, NAN, NAN(n-char-sequence_opt) etc.) > > - is the intention here that GDB deliberately accepts something beyond > > what would be valid in C source code? > > I don't know what gdb is intended to accept. So far I believe GDB is intended to be more relaxed than the C compiler. (PR symtab/11846 -> is accepted interchangeable with .) (static symbols get resolved from not-current CUs) etc. While thanks for catching it I still believe now my testcase update is the appropriate fix - if glibc supports then extended input syntax let the GDB user benefit from it. Thanks, Jan