> testsuite/
> * g++.dg/cpp1z/inline-var1.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp1z/inline-var1a.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp1z/inline-var1.h: New file.
This one fails on SPARC/Solaris:
0xfefcaa58 in _lwp_kill () from /lib/libc.so.1
(gdb) bt
#0 0xfefcaa58 in _lwp_kill () from /lib/libc.so.1
#1 0xfef65a64 in raise () from /lib/libc.so.1
#2 0xfef41954 in abort () from /lib/libc.so.1
#3 0x00011770 in bar (x=16) at inline-var1.C:34
#4 0x00012984 in __static_initialization_and_destruction_0 (__initialize_p=1,
__priority=65535) at inline-var1a.C:6
#5 0x00012b18 in _GLOBAL__sub_I_alt1 () at inline-var1a.C:44
#6 0x00012b54 in __do_global_ctors_aux ()
#7 0x00012b8c in _init ()
#8 0x00011458 in _start ()
(gdb) frame 3
#3 0x00011770 in bar (x=16) at inline-var1.C:34
34 __builtin_abort ();
(gdb) frame 4
#4 0x00012984 in __static_initialization_and_destruction_0 (__initialize_p=1,
__priority=65535) at inline-var1a.C:6
6 static inline int var19 = bar (16);
(gdb) p w
$2 = 0
The testcase is rather cryptic, in particular the logic in 'bar', so it's hard
to figure out what doesn't work as expected, but does it require support for
constructor priorities for example? Or does it assume an order of invocation
for the constructors of inline-var1.C vs those of inline-var1a.C?
--
Eric Botcazou
