1 files changed, 51 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.old-deja/g++.bugs/900428_01.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.old-deja/g++.bugs/900428_01.C
new file mode 100755
index 0000000..b46fc46
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.old-deja/g++.bugs/900428_01.C
@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+// g++ 1.37.1 bug 900428_01
+
+// g++ fails to issue error messages for cases where an incomplete type
+// object must be evaluated if the value of such an evaluation is not
+// actually used in the given context.
+
+// In the case where such an object is volatile, it is obvious that this
+// could be a problem, however I believe that errors should be issued
+// for such cases regardless of whether or not such values are volatile
+// because the abstract semantics seem to require the evaluation of such
+// values whether they are volatile or not.
+
+// keywords: incomplete types, evaluation, volatile qualifier
+// Build don't link: 
+
+int i;
+
+void *pv;
+volatile void *pvv;
+struct s;
+extern struct s es, *ps;
+extern volatile struct s evs, *pvs;
+
+void pv_test ()
+{
+  *pv;			// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+  (i ? *pv : *pv);	// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+  *pv, *pv;		// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+
+  *pvv;			// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+  (i ? *pvv : *pvv);	// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+  *pvv, *pvv;		// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+
+  es;			// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+  (i ? es : es);	// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+  es, es;		// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+
+  evs;			// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+  (i ? evs : evs);	// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+  evs, evs;		// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+
+  *ps;			// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+  (i ? *ps : *ps);	// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+  *ps, *ps;		// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+
+  *pvs;			// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+  (i ? *pvs : *pvs);	// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+  *pvs, *pvs;		// ERROR - , XFAIL *-*-*
+}
+
+int main () { return 0; }