1 files changed, 67 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.old-deja/g++.brendan/copy8.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.old-deja/g++.brendan/copy8.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..fe248bae34d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.old-deja/g++.brendan/copy8.C
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+// GROUPS passed copy-ctors
+/*
+This report is for GCC 2.3.3 running on a Sun/4.  The bug is that when
+a class instance is passed-by-value, GCC does not correctly copy the value.
+At the end of this report is an example program that demonstrates the bug.  
+It should print:
+
+	construct A('x')
+	copy A('x')
+	destruct A('x')
+	destruct A('x')
+
+and in fact does for IBM's xlC C++.  However, for GCC 2.3.3, it fails
+to print the second line ["copy A('x')"], which indicates that it failed
+to call the copy-constructor for class A when it should have.  Below is a 
+typescript that lists the program, shows how I compiled it, and shows the 
+incorrect output.
+*/
+
+extern "C" void printf (char *, ...);
+extern "C" void exit (int);
+
+int count = 0;
+
+void
+die (int x)
+{
+  if (x != ++count)
+    {
+      printf ("FAIL\n");
+      exit (1);
+    }
+}
+
+class A { // Class with explicit & instrumented copy-constructor and destructor.
+public:
+    const char * id;
+    A( const char * id1 ) : id(id1) { die (1); }
+
+    // Copy constructor
+    A( const A& a ) : id(a.id) { die (2); }
+
+    // Destructor
+    ~A() { count++; if (count != 3 && count != 4) die (-1); }
+};
+
+class X { // Class without explicit copy-constructor
+private:
+    A a;
+public:
+    X( const char * id ) : a(id) {}
+};
+
+void Func( X x ) {      // Function with call-by-value argument
+}
+
+int
+main() {
+    X x("x");           // Construct instance of x.
+
+    // The next line should call the copy-constructor for X since x is
+    // being passed by value.  For GCC 2.3.3 on a Sun/4, it does not.
+    Func(x);
+
+    printf ("PASS\n");
+    return 0;
+}