From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-55612-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 5732 invoked by alias); 1 May 2008 17:29:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 5723 invoked by uid 22791); 1 May 2008 17:29:21 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from imr2.ericy.com (HELO imr2.ericy.com) (198.24.6.3)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 May 2008 17:28:50 +0000
Received: from eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se (eusrcmw750.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.77.50]) 	by imr2.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m41HSjk7032473; 	Thu, 1 May 2008 12:28:45 -0500
Received: from ecamlmw720.eamcs.ericsson.se ([142.133.1.72]) by eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); 	 Thu, 1 May 2008 12:28:45 -0500
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; 	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [PATCH:MI] Return a subset of a variable object's children
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 17:29:00 -0000
Message-ID: <6D19CA8D71C89C43A057926FE0D4ADAA04E1BD0F@ecamlmw720.eamcs.ericsson.se>
References: <6D19CA8D71C89C43A057926FE0D4ADAA042910B7@ecamlmw720.eamcs.ericsson.se> <200805011955.54191.vladimir@codesourcery.com>
From: "Marc Khouzam" <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com>
To: "Vladimir Prus" <vladimir@codesourcery.com>
Cc: "Nick Roberts" <nickrob@snap.net.nz>, <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-05/txt/msg00013.txt.bz2

> > How about something like this (assuming quick_push does what I think it=
 does)
> >=20
> >   var->children =3D VEC_alloc(varobj_p, var->num_children);
> >   for (i=3D0; i<var->num_children; i++)
> >     VEC_quick_push (varobj_p, var->children, NULL);
> >=20
> > Same loop, but it avoids having to reallocate the vector.
>=20
> Yes, it's a bit more efficient.

In fact, I actually just read the vec.h header comment and that is pretty
much what is recommended.  In fact, the size value passed to VEC_alloc
should probably be negative here, to have even more efficiency, since
we know the vector won't grow.

But that is no longer the case with Nick's patch, as the vector will keep
on growing.