From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24668 invoked by alias); 19 Oct 2016 12:47:36 -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 23345 invoked by uid 89); 19 Oct 2016 12:47:36 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=lands, week's, rudo, ups X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 12:47:25 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7207C80B56; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 12:47:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u9JClNob022085; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 08:47:23 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 31/31] Support an "unlimited" number of user-defined arguments To: Philipp Rudo , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <1476839539-8374-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <1476839539-8374-32-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <20161019133349.2bc6ccf2@ThinkPad> From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <35a899f9-9014-3b1f-8b12-e807ed290caa@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 12:47:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20161019133349.2bc6ccf2@ThinkPad> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00564.txt.bz2 On 10/19/2016 12:33 PM, Philipp Rudo wrote: > Pedro Alves wrote: >> I also needed a way to convert a number to a std::string, so I added a >> new utility for that, gdb::to_string. Yet another thing that can go >> away with C++11. > [... snip ...] >> +/* Returns a string representation of VAL. Replacement for >> + std::to_string, which is only available in C++11 or later. */ >> + >> +namespace gdb { >> + >> +template >> +inline std::string >> +to_string (const T &val) >> +{ >> + std::stringstream ss; >> + >> + ss << val; >> + return ss.str (); >> +} >> + >> +} >> + >> /* Make a copy of the string at PTR with LEN characters >> (and add a null character at the end in the copy). >> Uses malloc to get the space. Returns the address of the copy. */ > > Is this really necessary? > As far as I understood the discussion, we jump directly to C++11. Thus there is no need for an homemade to_string. We haven't actually officially committed to requiring C++11, so I didn't want to be blocked by that. It's trivial to remove that bit latter if this lands first. On C++11, I was just giving time for the follow ups to last week's discussion to settle: https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00497.html https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00556.html and give everyone a chance to comment (or re-comment after consideration). No one commented on the patches linked to from here either: https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-10/msg00497.html Up until last week I wasn't even thinking that going C++11 would be possible. So I don't want to look like I'm rushing it. But now it feels like I'm the one delaying .... :-P Maybe I should just press ahead and be done with it. Thanks, Pedro Alves