PATCH: Update libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected

[H. J. Lu]

On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 02:41:15PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> 
> > I agree we shouldn't change those testcases which are passing. The
> > failed ones are just reminders for us how they should be fixed.
> 
> But even for failing cases, changing the expected output changes the
> functional specifications for the code.  That's never an obvious
> change.

There was never a functional specification for those failed tests. The
one in libiberty is copied from libstdc++.

> 
> > I don't agree syncing with the original working source is blindly
> > updating unless the original one is wrong.
> 
> If libiberty and libstdc++ shared sources for the demangler, and there
> was an agreement in place to keep them in sync, and the testsuite
> change was done in conjunction with a source change, and it was all
> discussed and approved for libstdc++, you'd be right.
> 
> But it's not.

Regardless if libiberty and libstdc++ share the demangler source or
not, should they have the same output on the same input for those
failed ones in libiberty? If not, why?


H.J.