From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 126141 invoked by alias); 9 Feb 2017 18:52:14 -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 126128 invoked by uid 89); 9 Feb 2017 18:52:14 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=H*i:sk:14228db, H*f:sk:14228db X-HELO: gproxy2-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com Received: from gproxy2-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (HELO gproxy2-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com) (69.89.18.3) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with SMTP; Thu, 09 Feb 2017 18:52:03 +0000 Received: (qmail 11342 invoked by uid 0); 9 Feb 2017 18:52:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cmgw3) (10.0.90.84) by gproxy2.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 9 Feb 2017 18:52:02 -0000 Received: from box522.bluehost.com ([74.220.219.122]) by cmgw3 with id iirz1u0082f2jeq01is2Hf; Thu, 09 Feb 2017 11:52:02 -0700 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=WOnsABcR c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=GsOEXm/OWkKvwdLVJsfwcA==:117 a=GsOEXm/OWkKvwdLVJsfwcA==:17 a=L9H7d07YOLsA:10 a=9cW_t1CCXrUA:10 a=s5jvgZ67dGcA:10 a=n2v9WMKugxEA:10 a=20KFwNOVAAAA:8 a=VgoqZ0K93k1WTIZp9bsA:9 a=e_O65bzb51kRm2y5VmPK:22 Received: from 174-16-146-181.hlrn.qwest.net ([174.16.146.181]:47804 helo=pokyo) by box522.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1cbtp0-000112-Sm; Thu, 09 Feb 2017 11:51:58 -0700 From: Tom Tromey To: Pedro Alves Cc: Simon Marchi , Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA 3/5] Introduce gdbpy_subclass and use it to simplify some logic References: <20170115134253.24018-1-tom@tromey.com> <20170115134253.24018-4-tom@tromey.com> <14228db3-a759-a117-e088-2542da718106@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2017 18:52:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <14228db3-a759-a117-e088-2542da718106@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Thu, 9 Feb 2017 11:44:04 +0000") Message-ID: <8760kj6vub.fsf@tromey.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.91 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BWhitelist: no X-Exim-ID: 1cbtp0-000112-Sm X-Source-Sender: 174-16-146-181.hlrn.qwest.net (pokyo) [174.16.146.181]:47804 X-Source-Auth: tom+tromey.com X-Email-Count: 3 X-Source-Cap: ZWx5bnJvYmk7ZWx5bnJvYmk7Ym94NTIyLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ== X-SW-Source: 2017-02/txt/msg00234.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: >> I don't really like gdbpy_subclass, I think there should be "ref" in the >> name to be clear. So it could be gdbpy_subclass_ref. However, I find >> gdbpy_subclass_ref a bit long. As you may have >> seen in my version of the patch, I had decided to keep gdbpy_ref for >> PyObjects and introduce typedef for other types (gdbpy_inf_ref). So I >> could see one called gdbpy_bp_ref. >> >> Otherwise, I like gdbpy_ref<> and gdbpy_ref. Pedro> I agree. Simon's gdbpy_ref_base + typedef idea would work for me too. This patch would mean introducing 12 typedefs, most used (so far) in a single spot. That doesn't seem so great to me, so I think I will look at the gdbpy_ref<> rename instead. Tom