2003-04-23 David Carlton <carlton@bactrian.org>

	* cp-support.c (cp_find_first_component): Accept 'operator' in
	more locations.

2003-04-23  David Carlton  <carlton@bactrian.org>

	* gdb.c++/maint.exp (test_first_component): Add tests for
	'operator' in more locations.

diff --git a/gdb/ChangeLog b/gdb/ChangeLog
index 3652f50..1acb38c 100644 (file)
--- a/gdb/ChangeLog
+++ b/gdb/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
+2003-04-23  David Carlton  <carlton@bactrian.org>
+
+       * cp-support.c (cp_find_first_component): Accept 'operator' in
+       more locations.
+
 2003-04-23  Andrew Cagney  <cagney@redhat.com>
 
        * infcall.c (call_function_by_hand): Eliminate redundant

diff --git a/gdb/cp-support.c b/gdb/cp-support.c
index ca47854..14456f8 100644 (file)
--- a/gdb/cp-support.c
+++ b/gdb/cp-support.c
@@ -57,16 +57,7 @@ static void first_component_command (char *arg, int from_tty);
      'foo' in an anonymous namespace gets demangled as "(anonymous
      namespace)::foo".
 
-   - And operator names can contain parentheses or angle brackets.
-     Fortunately, I _think_ that operator names can only occur in a
-     fairly restrictive set of locations (in particular, they have be
-     at depth 0, don't they?).  */
-
-/* NOTE: carlton/2003-02-21: Daniel Jacobowitz came up with an example
-   where operator names don't occur at depth 0.  Sigh.  (It involved a
-   template argument that was a pointer: I hadn't realized that was
-   possible.)  Handling such edge cases does not seem like a
-   high-priority problem to me.  */
+   - And operator names can contain parentheses or angle brackets.  */
 
 /* FIXME: carlton/2003-03-13: We have several functions here with
    overlapping functionality; can we combine them?  Also, do they
@@ -209,40 +200,14 @@ method_name_from_physname (const char *physname)
 unsigned int
 cp_find_first_component (const char *name)
 {
-  /* Names like 'operator<<' screw up the recursion, so let's
-     special-case them.  I _hope_ they can only occur at the start of
-     a component.  */
-
   unsigned int index = 0;
-
-  if (strncmp (name, "operator", LENGTH_OF_OPERATOR) == 0)
-    {
-      index += LENGTH_OF_OPERATOR;
-      while (isspace(name[index]))
-       ++index;
-      switch (name[index])
-       {
-       case '<':
-         if (name[index + 1] == '<')
-           index += 2;
-         else
-           index += 1;
-         break;
-       case '>':
-       case '-':
-         if (name[index + 1] == '>')
-           index += 2;
-         else
-           index += 1;
-         break;
-       case '(':
-         index += 2;
-         break;
-       default:
-         index += 1;
-         break;
-       }
-    }
+  /* Operator names can show up in unexpected places.  Since these can
+     contain parentheses or angle brackets, they can screw up the
+     recursion.  But not every string 'operator' is part of an
+     operater name: e.g. you could have a variable 'cooperator'.  So
+     this variable tells us whether or not we should treat the string
+     'operator' as starting an operator.  */
+  int operator_possible = 1;
 
   for (;; ++index)
     {
@@ -261,6 +226,7 @@ cp_find_first_component (const char *name)
              gdb_assert (name[index] == ':');
              index += 2;
            }
+         operator_possible = 1;
          break;
        case '(':
          /* Similar comment as to '<'.  */
@@ -272,13 +238,63 @@ cp_find_first_component (const char *name)
              gdb_assert (name[index] == ':');
              index += 2;
            }
+         operator_possible = 1;
          break;
        case '>':
        case ')':
        case '\0':
        case ':':
          return index;
+       case 'o':
+         /* Operator names can screw up the recursion.  */
+         if (operator_possible
+             && strncmp (name + index, "operator", LENGTH_OF_OPERATOR) == 0)
+           {
+             index += LENGTH_OF_OPERATOR;
+             while (isspace(name[index]))
+               ++index;
+             switch (name[index])
+               {
+                 /* Skip over one less than the appropriate number of
+                    characters: the for loop will skip over the last
+                    one.  */
+               case '<':
+                 if (name[index + 1] == '<')
+                   index += 1;
+                 else
+                   index += 0;
+                 break;
+               case '>':
+               case '-':
+                 if (name[index + 1] == '>')
+                   index += 1;
+                 else
+                   index += 0;
+                 break;
+               case '(':
+                 index += 1;
+                 break;
+               default:
+                 index += 0;
+                 break;
+               }
+           }
+         operator_possible = 0;
+         break;
+       case ' ':
+       case ',':
+       case '.':
+       case '&':
+       case '*':
+         /* NOTE: carlton/2003-04-18: I'm not sure what the precise
+            set of relevant characters are here: it's necessary to
+            include any character that can show up before 'operator'
+            in a demangled name, and it's safe to include any
+            character that can't be part of an identifier's name.  */
+         operator_possible = 1;
+         break;
        default:
+         operator_possible = 0;
          break;
        }
     }

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog b/gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog
index 7ace150..96b2838 100644 (file)
--- a/gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
+2003-04-23  David Carlton  <carlton@bactrian.org>
+
+       * gdb.c++/maint.exp (test_first_component): Add tests for
+       'operator' in more locations.
+
 2003-04-16  Kevin Buettner  <kevinb@redhat.com>
 
        * gdb.base/args.exp: Invoke gdb_load for simulator targets.

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.c++/maint.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.c++/maint.exp
index 6e1da97..a0f15f9 100644 (file)
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.c++/maint.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.c++/maint.exp
@@ -63,6 +63,18 @@ proc test_first_component {} {
     test_single_component "foo(std::basic_streambuf<wchar_t,std::char_traits<wchar_t> >)"
     test_single_component "operator>(X::Y)"
 
+    # Operator names can show up in weird places.
+
+    test_single_component "int operator<< <char>()"
+    test_single_component "T<Cooperator>"
+
+    # NOTE: carlton/2003-04-23: I've only seen the first of these
+    # produced by the demangler, but I'm including two more just to be
+    # on the safe side.
+    test_single_component "int foo<&(operator<<(C, C))>()"
+    test_single_component "int foo<&operator<<(C, C)>()"
+    test_single_component "int foo<operator<<(C, C)>()"
+
     gdb_test "maint cp first_component foo::bar" "foo"
     gdb_test "maint cp first_component foo::bar::baz" "foo"
     gdb_test "maint cp first_component C<A>::bar" "C<A>"