From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3582 invoked by alias); 1 Apr 2004 21:06:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 3515 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2004 21:06:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Apr 2004 21:06:10 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.30 #1 (Debian)) id 1B99O4-0003oL-Cn; Thu, 01 Apr 2004 16:06:08 -0500 Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2004 21:06:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Jim Blandy Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, ezannoni@redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa/dwarf] Use objfile_data mechanism for per-objfile data Message-ID: <20040401210608.GA9848@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Jim Blandy , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, ezannoni@redhat.com References: <20040401171557.GA17948@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00040.txt.bz2 On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 03:57:16PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote: > > Wonderful! So it turns out 'struct dwarf2_pinfo' has only one real > member, huh? :) On my branch it has two - I added a per-psymtab hash table in some cases. > I have to say, 'dwarf2_per_objfile_data', 'struct > dwarf2_per_objfile_data', and 'dwarf2_per_objfile' are not my favorite > cluster of names. It took me a few passes to get it straight. (Yes, > I should have gotten more sleep, but I suspect there are others who > work under the same conditions...) > > How about: > - 'dwarf2_objfile_data_key' for the 'struct objfile_data', and > - 'struct dwarf2_objfile' and 'dwarf2_objfile' for the actual > per-objfile datatype and the global pointer to the current instance? > > (Is that any better? I think suffixes like "_data" really only belong > on things whose type is unspecified at the point where the name > appears, like 'void *' pointers, or objects related to them. I mean, > everything is "data"; if you're going to give something a > generic-sounding name, that should be because you're emphasizing the > genericness of it.) I don't think that's any better. "dwarf2_objfile" implies that it's a kind of objfile. But I'm willing to use your names :) > The lower-case implicit-parameter macros bug me. But I assume they're > going away soon, and upper-casing them would make the patch huge, > right? I didn't have a particular plan in either direction. Doing either would be an easy follow-on. Replacing them with their expansions would be noisy indentation-wise, but otherwise trivial - that may be best. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer