More libiberty/demangler fallout - gdb (was: Re: Er, ...)

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 12:40:45PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> Er, the number of failures on NetBSD/PPC just jumped from ~147 to ~650. 
>  This segment of bitfields.c illustrates the problem.  I don't think it 
> is my cleanups here :-/
> 
> ac131313@nettle$ gcc --version
> egcs-1.1.2
> 
> Generates stabs in elf.

(You scared me!  bitfields.c has nothing to do with the problem :)

The problem is:

> (gdb) print/x flags
> $11 = {uc = 0xff, s1 = 0x0, u1 = 0x1, s2 = 0x0, u2 = 0x3, s3 = 0x0, u3 = 
> 0x7, s9 = 0x0, u
> 9 = 0x1ff, sc = 0x0}
> (gdb) PASS: gdb.base/bitfields.exp: bitfield containment #1
> 
> 
> (gdb) print/x flags
> $11 = {uc = 0xff, short = 0x0, u1 = 0x1, short = 0x0, u2 = 0x3, short = 
> 0x0, u3
> = 0x7, short = 0x0, u9 = 0x1ff, short = 0x0}
> (gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/bitfields.exp: bitfield containment #1

All the 's1's have been replaced by 'short'.  This is because of the
current argument on one of the gcc lists about how the demangler should
treat symbols that may be mangled but without the leading mangling
prefix for v3 mangling.

GCC folks, can we please get this fixed?

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz                           Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer