# Copyright 1992, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002,
# 2003, 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
# it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
# the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
# (at your option) any later version.
#
# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
# GNU General Public License for more details.
#
# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
# along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
# Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA.
# This file was written by Fred Fish. (fnf@cygnus.com)
# And rewritten by Michael Chastain <mec.gnu@mindspring.com>.
set nl "\[\r\n\]+"
if $tracelevel then {
strace $tracelevel
}
if { [skip_cplus_tests] } { continue }
load_lib "cp-support.exp"
set testfile "classes"
set srcfile ${testfile}.cc
set binfile ${objdir}/${subdir}/${testfile}
if { [gdb_compile "${srcdir}/${subdir}/${srcfile}" "${binfile}" executable {debug c++}] != "" } {
gdb_suppress_entire_file "Testcase compile failed, so all tests in this file will automatically fail."
}
# Test ptype of class objects.
proc test_ptype_class_objects {} {
# Simple type.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype struct default_public_struct" "" "struct" "default_public_struct" \
{
{ field public "int a;" }
{ field public "int b;" }
}
# Another simple type.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype struct explicit_public_struct" "" "struct" "explicit_public_struct" \
{
{ field public "int a;" }
{ field public "int b;" }
}
# Another simple type.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype struct protected_struct" "" "struct" "protected_struct" \
{
{ field protected "int a;" }
{ field protected "int b;" }
}
# Another simple type.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype struct private_struct" "" "struct" "private_struct" \
{
{ field private "int a;" }
{ field private "int b;" }
}
# A bigger type.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype struct mixed_protection_struct" "" "struct" "mixed_protection_struct" \
{
{ field public "int a;" }
{ field public "int b;" }
{ field private "int c;" }
{ field private "int d;" }
{ field protected "int e;" }
{ field protected "int f;" }
{ field public "int g;" }
{ field private "int h;" }
{ field protected "int i;" }
}
# All that again with "class" instead of "struct".
# gdb does not care about the difference anyways.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class public_class" "" "class" "public_class" \
{
{ field public "int a;" }
{ field public "int b;" }
}
# Another simple type.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class protected_class" "" "class" "protected_class" \
{
{ field protected "int a;" }
{ field protected "int b;" }
}
# Another simple type.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class default_private_class" "" "class" "default_private_class" \
{
{ field private "int a;" }
{ field private "int b;" }
}
# Another simple type.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class explicit_private_class" "" "class" "explicit_private_class" \
{
{ field private "int a;" }
{ field private "int b;" }
}
# A bigger type.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class mixed_protection_class" "" "class" "mixed_protection_class" \
{
{ field public "int a;" }
{ field public "int b;" }
{ field private "int c;" }
{ field private "int d;" }
{ field protected "int e;" }
{ field protected "int f;" }
{ field public "int g;" }
{ field private "int h;" }
{ field protected "int i;" }
}
# Here are some classes with inheritance.
# Base class.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class A" "" "class" "A" \
{
{ field public "int a;" }
{ field public "int x;" }
}
# Derived class.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class B" "" "class" "B" \
{
{ base "public A" }
{ field public "int b;" }
{ field public "int x;" }
}
# Derived class.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class C" "" "class" "C" \
{
{ base "public A" }
{ field public "int c;" }
{ field public "int x;" }
}
# Derived class, multiple inheritance.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class D" "" "class" "D" \
{
{ base "public B" }
{ base "public C" }
{ field public "int d;" }
{ field public "int x;" }
}
# Derived class.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class E" "" "class" "E" \
{
{ base "public D" }
{ field public "int e;" }
{ field public "int x;" }
}
# This is a break from inheritance tests.
#
# gcc 2.X with stabs (stabs or stabs+?) used to have a problem with
# static methods whose name is the same as their argument mangling.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class Static" "" "class" "Static" \
{
{ method public "static void ii(int, int);" }
}
# Here are some virtual inheritance tests.
# A virtual base class.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class vA" "" "class" "vA" \
{
{ field public "int va;" }
{ field public "int vx;" }
}
# A derived class with a virtual base.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class vB" "" "class" "vB" \
{
{ base "public virtual vA" }
{ vbase "vA" }
{ field public "int vb;" }
{ field public "int vx;" }
}
# Another derived class with a virtual base.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class vC" "" "class" "vC" \
{
{ base "public virtual vA" }
{ vbase "vA" }
{ field public "int vc;" }
{ field public "int vx;" }
}
# A classic diamond class.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class vD" "" "class" "vD" \
{
{ base "public virtual vB" }
{ base "public virtual vC" }
{ vbase "vC" }
{ vbase "vB" }
{ field public "int vd;" }
{ field public "int vx;" }
}
# A class derived from a diamond class.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class vE" "" "class" "vE" \
{
{ base "public virtual vD" }
{ vbase "vD" }
{ field public "int ve;" }
{ field public "int vx;" }
}
# Another inheritance series.
# A base class.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class Base1" "" "class" "Base1" \
{
{ field public "int x;" }
{ method public "Base1(int);" }
}
# Another base class.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class Foo" "" "class" "Foo" \
{
{ field public "int x;" }
{ field public "int y;" }
{ field public "static int st;" }
{ method public "Foo(int, int);" }
{ method public "int operator!();" }
{ method public "operator int();" }
{ method public "int times(int);" }
} \
"" \
{
{
"operator int();"
"int operator int();"
{ setup_kfail "gdb/1497" "*-*-*" }
}
{
"operator int();"
"int operator int(void);"
{ setup_kfail "gdb/1497" "*-*-*" }
}
}
# A multiple inheritance derived class.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype class Bar" "" "class" "Bar" \
{
{ base "public Base1" }
{ base "public Foo" }
{ field public "int z;" }
{ method public "Bar(int, int, int);" }
}
}
# Test simple access to class members.
proc test_non_inherited_member_access {} {
# Print non-inherited members of g_A.
gdb_test "print g_A.a" ".* = 1"
gdb_test "print g_A.x" ".* = 2"
# Print non-inherited members of g_B.
gdb_test "print g_B.b" ".* = 5"
gdb_test "print g_B.x" ".* = 6"
# Print non-inherited members of g_C.
gdb_test "print g_C.c" ".* = 9"
gdb_test "print g_C.x" ".* = 10"
# Print non-inherited members of g_D.
gdb_test "print g_D.d" ".* = 19"
gdb_test "print g_D.x" ".* = 20"
# Print non-inherited members of g_E.
gdb_test "print g_E.e" ".* = 31"
gdb_test "print g_E.x" ".* = 32"
}
# Test access to members of other classes.
# gdb should refuse to print them.
# (I feel old -- I remember when this was legal in C -- chastain).
proc test_wrong_class_members {} {
gdb_test "print g_A.b" "There is no member( or method|) named b."
gdb_test "print g_B.c" "There is no member( or method|) named c."
gdb_test "print g_B.d" "There is no member( or method|) named d."
gdb_test "print g_C.b" "There is no member( or method|) named b."
gdb_test "print g_C.d" "There is no member( or method|) named d."
gdb_test "print g_D.e" "There is no member( or method|) named e."
}
# Test access to names that are not members of any class.
proc test_nonexistent_members {} {
gdb_test "print g_A.y" "There is no member( or method|) named y."
gdb_test "print g_B.z" "There is no member( or method|) named z."
gdb_test "print g_C.q" "There is no member( or method|) named q."
gdb_test "print g_D.p" "There is no member( or method|) named p."
}
# Call a method that expects a base class parameter with base, inherited,
# and unrelated class arguments.
proc test_method_param_class {} {
gdb_test "call class_param.Aptr_a (&g_A)" ".* = 1"
gdb_test "call class_param.Aptr_x (&g_A)" ".* = 2"
gdb_test "call class_param.Aptr_a (&g_B)" ".* = 3"
gdb_test "call class_param.Aptr_x (&g_B)" ".* = 4"
gdb_test "call class_param.Aref_a (g_A)" ".* = 1"
gdb_test "call class_param.Aref_x (g_A)" ".* = 2"
gdb_test "call class_param.Aref_a (g_B)" ".* = 3"
gdb_test "call class_param.Aref_x (g_B)" ".* = 4"
gdb_test "call class_param.Aval_a (g_A)" ".* = 1"
gdb_test "call class_param.Aval_x (g_A)" ".* = 2"
gdb_test "call class_param.Aval_a (g_B)" ".* = 3"
gdb_test "call class_param.Aval_x (g_B)" ".* = 4"
gdb_test "call class_param.Aptr_a (&foo)" "Cannot resolve .*" "unrelated class *param"
gdb_test "call class_param.Aref_a (foo)" "Cannot resolve .*" "unrelated class ¶m"
gdb_test "call class_param.Aval_a (foo)" "Cannot resolve .*" "unrelated class param"
}
# Examine a class with an enum field.
proc test_enums {} {
global gdb_prompt
global nl
# print the object
gdb_test "print obj_with_enum" \
"\\$\[0-9\]+ = \{priv_enum = red, x = 0\}" \
"print obj_with_enum (1)"
# advance one line
gdb_test "next" ""
# print the object again
gdb_test "print obj_with_enum" \
"\\$\[0-9\]+ = \{priv_enum = green, x = 0\}" \
"print obj_with_enum (2)"
# print the enum member
gdb_test "print obj_with_enum.priv_enum" "\\$\[0-9\]+ = green"
# ptype on the enum member
gdb_test_multiple "ptype obj_with_enum.priv_enum" "ptype obj_with_enum.priv_enum" {
-re "type = enum ClassWithEnum::PrivEnum \{ ?red, green, blue, yellow = 42 ?\}$nl$gdb_prompt $" {
pass "ptype obj_with_enum.priv_enum"
}
-re "type = enum PrivEnum \{ ?red, green, blue, yellow = 42 ?\}$nl$gdb_prompt $" {
# gcc 2.95.3 -gdwarf-2
# gcc 3.3.2 -gdwarf-2
pass "ptype obj_with_enum.priv_enum"
}
-re "type = enum \{ ?red, green, blue, yellow = 42 ?\}$nl$gdb_prompt $" {
# This case case is a little dubious, but it's not clear what
# ought to be required of a ptype on a private enum...
# -sts 19990324
#
# It bugs me that this happens with gcc 3.
# -- chastain 2003-12-30
#
# gcc 2.95.3 -gstabs+
# gcc 3.3.2 -gstabs+
# gcc HEAD 2003-12-28 21:08:30 UTC -gstabs+
pass "ptype obj_with_enum.priv_enum"
}
}
# ptype on the object
# NOTE: carlton/2003-02-28: One could certainly argue that plain
# "PrivEnum"
# is acceptable: PrivEnum is a member of ClassWithEnum, so
# there's no need to explicitly qualify its name with
# "ClassWithEnum::". The truth, though, is that GDB is simply
# forgetting that PrivEnum is a member of ClassWithEnum, so we do
# that output for a bad reason instead of a good reason. Under
# stabs, we probably can't get this right; under DWARF-2, we can.
cp_test_ptype_class \
"ptype obj_with_enum" "" "class" "ClassWithEnum" \
{
{ field public "ClassWithEnum::PrivEnum priv_enum;" }
{ field public "int x;" }
} \
"" \
{
{
"ClassWithEnum::PrivEnum priv_enum;"
"PrivEnum priv_enum;"
{ setup_kfail "gdb/57" "*-*-*" }
}
}
# I'll do this test two different ways, because of a parser bug.
# See PR gdb/1588.
gdb_test_multiple "print (ClassWithEnum::PrivEnum) 42" "print (ClassWithEnum::PrivEnum) 42" {
-re "\\$\[0-9\]+ = yellow$nl$gdb_prompt $" {
pass "print (ClassWithEnum::PrivEnum) 42"
}
-re "A (parse|syntax) error in expression, near `42'.$nl$gdb_prompt $" {
# "parse error" is bison 1.35.
# "syntax error" is bison 1.875.
kfail "gdb/1588" "print (ClassWithEnum::PrivEnum) 42"
}
}
gdb_test_multiple "print ('ClassWithEnum::PrivEnum') 42" "print ('ClassWithEnum::PrivEnum') 42" {
-re "\\$\[0-9\]+ = yellow$nl$gdb_prompt $" {
# gcc 3.3.2 -gstabs+
# gcc HEAD 2003-12-28 21:08:30 UTC -gstabs+
pass "print ('ClassWithEnum::PrivEnum') 42"
}
-re "No symbol \"ClassWithEnum::PrivEnum\" in current context.$nl$gdb_prompt $" {
# gcc 2.95.3 -gdwarf-2
# gcc 3.3.2 -gdwarf-2
# gcc HEAD 2003-12-28 21:08:30 UTC -gdwarf-2
# gcc 2.95.3 -gstabs+
kfail "gdb/57" "print ('ClassWithEnum::PrivEnum') 42"
}
}
}
# Pointers to class members
proc test_pointers_to_class_members {} {
gdb_test "print Bar::z" "\\$\[0-9\]+ = \\(int ?\\( ?Bar::& ?\\) ?\\) ?Bar::z"
gdb_test "print &Foo::x" "\\$\[0-9\]+ = \\(int ?\\( ?Foo::\\* ?\\) ?\\) ?&Foo::x"
gdb_test "print (int)&Foo::x" "\\$\[0-9\]+ = 0"
gdb_test "print (int)&Bar::y == 2*sizeof(int)" "\\$\[0-9\]+ = true"
# TODO: this is a bogus test. It's looking at a variable that
# has not even been declared yet, so it's accessing random junk
# on the stack and comparing that it's NOT equal to a specific
# value. It's been like this since gdb 4.10 in 1993!
# -- chastain 2004-01-01
gdb_test "print (int)pmi == sizeof(int)" ".* = false"
}
# Test static members.
proc test_static_members {} {
global hex
gdb_test "print Foo::st" "\\$\[0-9\]+ = 100"
gdb_test "set foo.st = 200" "" ""
gdb_test "print bar.st" "\\$\[0-9\]+ = 200"
gdb_test "print &foo.st" "\\$\[0-9\]+ = \\(int ?\\*\\) $hex"
gdb_test "print &Bar::st" "\\$\[0-9\]+ = \\(int ?\\*\\) $hex"
gdb_test "print *\$" "\\$\[0-9\]+ = 200"
gdb_test "set print static-members off" ""
gdb_test "print csi" \
"{x = 10, y = 20}" \
"print csi without static members"
gdb_test "print cnsi" \
"{x = 30, y = 40}" \
"print cnsi without static members"
gdb_test "set print static-members on" ""
gdb_test "print csi" \
"{x = 10, y = 20, static null = {x = 0, y = 0, static null = <same as static member of an already seen type>}}" \
"print csi with static members"
gdb_test "print cnsi" \
"{x = 30, y = 40, static null = {x = 0, y = 0, static null = <same as static member of an already seen type>, static yy = {z = 5, static xx = {x = 1, y = 2, static null = <same as static member of an already seen type>, static yy = <same as static member of an already seen type>}}}, static yy = <same as static member of an already seen type>}" \
"print cnsi with static members"
}
proc do_tests {} {
global prms_id
global bug_id
global subdir
global objdir
global srcdir
global binfile
global gdb_prompt
global nl
set prms_id 0
set bug_id 0
# Start with a fresh gdb.
gdb_exit
gdb_start
gdb_reinitialize_dir $srcdir/$subdir
gdb_load $binfile
gdb_test "set language c++" "" ""
gdb_test "set width 0" "" ""
if ![runto_main ] then {
perror "couldn't run to breakpoint"
return
}
gdb_breakpoint inheritance2
gdb_test "continue" ".*Breakpoint .* inheritance2.*" ""
test_ptype_class_objects
test_non_inherited_member_access
test_wrong_class_members
test_nonexistent_members
test_method_param_class
gdb_breakpoint enums2
gdb_test "continue" ".*Breakpoint .* enums2.*" "continue to enums2(\\(\\)|)"
gdb_test "finish" "" ""
test_enums
gdb_test "finish" "" ""
test_pointers_to_class_members
test_static_members
# Now some random tests that were just thrown in here.
gdb_breakpoint marker_reg1
gdb_test "continue" ".*Breakpoint .* marker_reg1.*" ""
gdb_test "finish" "Run till exit from.*" "finish from marker_reg1"
# This class is so small that an instance of it can fit in a register.
# When gdb tries to call a method, it gets embarrassed about taking
# the address of a register.
#
# TODO: I think that message should be a PASS, not an XFAIL.
# gdb prints an informative message and declines to do something
# impossible.
#
# The method call actually succeeds if the compiler allocates very
# small classes in memory instead of registers. So this test does
# not tell us anything interesting if the call succeeds.
#
# -- chastain 2003-12-31
gdb_test_multiple "print v.method ()" "calling method for small class" {
-re "\\$\[0-9\]+ = 82$nl$gdb_prompt $" {
# gcc 3.3.2 -gdwarf-2
# gcc HEAD 2003-12-28 21:08:30 UTC -gdwarf-2
# gcc 3.3.2 -gstabs+
# gcc HEAD 2003-12-28 21:08:30 UTC -gstabs+
pass "calling method for small class"
}
-re "Address requested for identifier \"v\" which is in register .*$nl$gdb_prompt $" {
# gcc 2.95.3 -gdwarf-2
# gcc 2.95.3 -gstabs+
setup_xfail "*-*-*" 2972
fail "calling method for small class"
}
}
}
do_tests