Re: fixinc regression for <math.h> with C++ on Solaris 9

[Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>]

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Bruce Korb wrote:
> I don't have CVS access here.  It might be interesting to do a ``cvs log''
> on gcc/fixinc/tests/base/math.h and see what happened to the same code.

It seems the code is still there. The only relevant changes I found were
the following, which seems harmless,

  date: 2003/01/04 21:14:54;  author: korbb;  state: Exp;  lines: +6 -6
  branches:  1.11.4;
  When wrapping files, guard with both the fix name and the file name

and

  revision 1.13
  date: 2003/08/01 22:48:24;  author: neroden;  state: Exp;  lines: +1 -0
        * fixinc/inclhack.def (broken_cabs): Make matching more generous.
        * fixinc/fixincl.x: Regenerate.
        * fixinc/tests/base/math.h: Regenerate to match test_text change.

which lead me to the following:

  revision 1.160
  date: 2003/07/09 21:00:01;  author: neroden;  state: Exp;  lines: +3 -2
        * fixinc/inclhack.def (math_exception):  Improve bypass and comment.
        * fixinc/fixincl.x: Rebuild.

Index: inclhack.def
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/fixinc/inclhack.def,v
retrieving revision 1.159
retrieving revision 1.160
diff -u -3 -p -r1.159 -r1.160
--- inclhack.def        8 Jul 2003 20:42:19 -0000       1.159
+++ inclhack.def        9 Jul 2003 21:00:01 -0000       1.160
@@ -1680,7 +1680,8 @@ fix = {


 /*
- *  Some math.h files define struct exception, which conflicts with
+ *  Some math.h files define struct exception (it's in the System V
+ *  Interface Definition), which conflicts with
  *  the class exception defined in the C++ file std/stdexcept.h.  We
  *  redefine it to __math_exception.  This is not a great fix, but I
  *  haven't been able to think of anything better.
@@ -1692,7 +1693,7 @@ fix = {
     hackname  = math_exception;
     files     = math.h;
     select    = "struct exception";
-    bypass    = 'We have a problem when using C\+\+';
+    bypass    = '__cplusplus';
     c_fix     = wrap;

     c_fix_arg = "#ifdef __cplusplus\n"

> If it is still there, then either the fix does not trigger on the real
> header but does on the test, or else someone committed an inclhack
> change without running the fixinc ``make check'' on the result.

>From my results above, it seems that Nathanel indeed only ran the
test weeks after making the patch.  fixinc is black magic to me, but
might that be the culprit?

> Just from inspection, there are *two* patches related to exceptions:
>
>   sunos_matherr_decl and math_exception
>
> but I do not see how they could interact on the header in question.
> They should be re-ordered, though.  It looks like the second fix would
> put a ``struct exception;'' in before the ``#ifdef __cplusplus'' thing.
> (The bypass clause should prevent the application of the fix on the
> header in question:

Hmm, that one's definitely a bit too steep for me. :-)

If there's any patch you'd like me to test, or any (header) file you'd
like me to send, I'll happily do that, though.

Gerald