* TODO: Add suggestion about passing a structure as the 7th argument.

1 files changed, 19 insertions, 4 deletions

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/TODO b/gdb/testsuite/TODO
index 153cb00..c40235f 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/TODO
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/TODO
@@ -10,6 +10,9 @@ test, but it hasn't been tried on a wide range of architectures).
 
 nodebug.exp--test printing variables.
 
+Test printing of structures passed by value, for the 7th, 8th, and
+9th arguments (PR 1714).
+
 Get crossload tests to use --with-targets and reenable them.
 
 corefile.exp:
@@ -41,10 +44,6 @@ weird.exp--test that unrecognized cross-reference types or
 unrecognized visibility or virtual characters get skipped properly
 (see stabs.texinfo).
 
-Test "jump" including jump to a breakpoint (the latter will need an
-xfail for UDI and probably VxWorks (PR 1786 for vxworks; PR 2416
-contains some info for 29k).
-
 Test C++ nested types (especially if PR 1954 is fixed; even if not
 *some* things already should work even in the presence of nested
 types).  Test classes nested more than 9 levels deep (g++ mangles
@@ -52,6 +51,18 @@ these differently) (both a demangle test and some tests which also
 test the compiler).  Test calling a method of a class nested more than
 9 levels (for gdb_mangle_name and demangling).
 
+Test printing complex types, including functions, pointers to arrays
+of pointers of functions, functions which return pointers to
+functions, etc.
+
+Test GDB expressions--test all operators (and overloaded operators for
+C++).  Test integer constants which are signed or unsigned int, long,
+or long long.  Test detection of overflow of an integer constant.
+Here are a few integer constants to test (test they get the right
+types): 5, 5LL, 5LuL, 5L6u (invalid), 5LU.  Maybe things like
+0x12345678, 0x87654321, etc., but their types depend on sizes of int,
+long, etc.
+
 Test that printing const-qualified versions of various types works.
 In particular, on the sparc and probably other machines, "double" is
 handled differently from most types because it requires more alignment
@@ -117,6 +128,10 @@ If there are two breakpoints in the same place, and exactly one of
 them has its condition true, test that the correct breakpoint gets
 printed.
 
+Test "jump" including jump to a breakpoint (the latter will need an
+xfail for UDI and probably VxWorks (PR 1786 for vxworks; PR 2416
+contains some info for 29k).
+
 Set a watchpoint on a local variable (to be interesting, make a few
 calls, to be more interesting, make a recursive call).  Test that it
 gets disabled when leaving that scope.