From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11822 invoked by alias); 22 Jan 2013 18:05:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 11752 invoked by uid 48); 22 Jan 2013 18:05:43 -0000 From: "tromey at redhat dot com" To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug c++/8218] ptype claims destructors have arg Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 18:05:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: tromey at redhat dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: CC Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: contact gdb-prs-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-prs-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2013-q1/txt/msg00108.txt.bz2 http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8218 Tom Tromey changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tromey at redhat dot com --- Comment #3 from Tom Tromey 2013-01-22 18:05:34 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > 0x00000063: DW_TAG_formal_parameter [4] > 0x00000064: DW_AT_type [DW_FORM_ref4] (cu + 0x0071 => {0x00000071}) > 0x00000068: DW_AT_artificial [DW_FORM_flag] (0x01) > Shall we close this & open a GCC bug instead? (& change the kfail to an xfail > referencing the GCC bug - and add the correct pattern so Clang can pass this > test) Arguably it is still a gdb bug since the parameter is marked artificial. I think that gdb may be making an explicit choice here, though, since c_type_print_args explicitly prints artificial arguments. There is a GCC bug in this area: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37237 It may not seem related but if you read the comments, the gist is that GCC is just emitting DWARF for one of the constructors, whereas it should probably emit DWARF for all of them. Adding a pattern for clang to pass seems fine to me. -- Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.