Re: [RFA] Revised C++ ABI abstraction patches

Michael Snyder
2001-03-15T11:32:00Z

Jim Blandy wrote:
>
> Michael Elizabeth Chastain <chastain@cygnus.com> writes:
> > Lightly proofread, no obvious errors found.
>
> Great. That means all the bugs still there are non-obvious, and will
> take a long time to find. Just make my day, will you. (Thanks.)
>
> > I would prefer constructor_prefix_p et al to be real functions rather
> > than macros. When I single-step code in gdb, it's a lot easier to follow
> > real functions than macros.
>
> I agree completely. But it is not the standard practice (see target.h
> and elsewhere) and others don't seem to mind. So I reined in my prima
> donna urges and left them as macros.

There is an ongoing effort to get away from that.
Go ahead, Jim -- let your prima donna run free! ;-)

>
> And besides, function calls are so slow. Remember, GDB's performance
> matters a lot --- it's used to debug real-time operating systems!

I assume you're joking.