From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 33830 invoked by alias); 9 Apr 2018 19:45:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 33762 invoked by uid 89); 9 Apr 2018 19:45:23 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=worthwhile X-HELO: smtp.polymtl.ca Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (HELO smtp.polymtl.ca) (132.207.4.11) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 19:45:21 +0000 Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id w39Jj3Om018208 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 15:45:08 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 9CB831E778; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 15:45:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from simark.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F0D31E17E; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 15:45:03 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 19:45:00 -0000 From: Simon Marchi To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use an std::vector for inline_states In-Reply-To: <5d1e75f3-6f53-9da8-ffe5-95ef6d7795ee@redhat.com> References: <20180407144205.20909-1-simon.marchi@polymtl.ca> <6bcda047-7dbd-79ed-8eec-2bd5d59f6749@redhat.com> <3d8cc397-b7d5-b705-bf5f-8eff154eb587@redhat.com> <5d1e75f3-6f53-9da8-ffe5-95ef6d7795ee@redhat.com> Message-ID: <18cfea83a1c38452412c906452ad38ae@polymtl.ca> X-Sender: simon.marchi@polymtl.ca User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.4 X-Poly-FromMTA: (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) at Mon, 9 Apr 2018 19:45:03 +0000 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-04/txt/msg00167.txt.bz2 On 2018-04-09 05:10, Pedro Alves wrote: > Hi, > > I remembered now that I forgot so point at something that I had wanted > to mention before. > > It's that I think that this: > >> +template >> +T >> +unordered_remove (std::vector &vec, typename >> std::vector::iterator it) >> +{ > > won't work as is with gdb::def_vector/gdb::byte_vector, because the > above > assumes std::vector has a single template parameter, while in reality > it > has two. > > I think this can either be fixed by adding an allocator template > parameter > to unordered_remove: > > template > void > unordered_erase (std::vector &v, > typename std::vector::iterator pos) > > or by making the whole vector/container type a template like in > my example: > > template > void > unordered_erase (Vector &v, typename Vector::iterator pos) That sounds like a good change, but let's do it as a separate patch (as renaming the functions). I was wondering if it would also be worthwhile to have an equivalent of std::remove_if that doesn't preserve the order of the remaining elements (which could have been used in this patch). I pushed my patch in, including the missing usage of unordered_remove that you pointed out in your other message. Thanks, Simon