Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj@redhat.com>
To: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Cc: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>,
	 GDB Patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] C++ify gdb/common/environ.c
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 18:23:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87lgonx2dg.fsf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1e62abc1-ab02-65dd-f520-27120be033b8@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's	message of "Mon, 19 Jun 2017 19:09:27 +0100")

On Monday, June 19 2017, Pedro Alves wrote:

> On 06/19/2017 06:59 PM, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
>> On Monday, June 19 2017, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> 
>>> On 06/19/2017 05:26 PM, Simon Marchi wrote:
>>>> On 2017-06-19 17:44, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>>>> If we take the "always push a NULL on construction" approach, and
>>>>> we want moved-from gdb_environs to be valid, then yes.  Note how this
>>>>> results in extra heap allocations when e.g., returning a
>>>>> gdb_environ from functions by value, and makes std::vector<gdb_environ>
>>>>> much less efficient when it decides it needs to reallocate/move
>>>>> elements.  Representing the empty state with a cleared internal
>>>>> vector would avoid this.
>>>>
>>>> Given the move case, since the goal is to be efficient, then yeah I
>>>> would agree
>>>> that it would make sense to make a little bit of efforts to avoid
>>>> allocating
>>>> memory for an objects we are almost certainly throwing away.
>>>>
>>>> But still, in order to leave environ objects in a valid state after a
>>>> move and
>>>> to pedantically comply with the STL spec which says that the vector is
>>>> left in
>>>> an unspecified state, shouldn't we do a .clear () on the moved-from
>>>> vector after
>>>> the move?
>>>
>>> See accepted answer at:
>>>
>>>  https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17730689/is-a-moved-from-vector-always-empty
>>>
>>> So the only case where it'd be needed would be in op=, and iff the 
>>> vectors had different allocators, which is not the case here.
>>> So no, it's not necessary.  But I'd be fine with calling it.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Note BTW, that we need to be careful with self-move leaving the
>>>>> *this object in a valid state.
>>>>
>>>> Should we just do
>>>>
>>>> if (&other == this)
>>>>   return *this;
>>>
>>> Might not be necessary if without that the object ends up
>>> valid anyway.  But what you wrote is a safe bet.
>> 
>> So, what do you guys think about the patch below, which applies on top
>> of the original?
>
> Missed fixing move ctor?
>
> +  /* Move constructor.  */
> +  gdb_environ (gdb_environ &&e)
> +    : m_environ_vector (std::move (e.m_environ_vector))
> +  {}

Indeed.  Fixed now.  I'll submit v7.

Thanks,

-- 
Sergio
GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF  31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36
Please send encrypted e-mail if possible
http://sergiodj.net/


  reply	other threads:[~2017-06-19 18:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-04-13  4:05 [PATCH] " Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-04-15 18:51 ` [PATCH v2] " Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-04-15 21:22   ` Simon Marchi
2017-04-18  2:49     ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-04-16  5:09   ` Simon Marchi
2017-04-16 17:32     ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-04-18  3:03 ` [PATCH v3] " Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-04-19  4:56   ` Simon Marchi
2017-04-19 16:30     ` Pedro Alves
2017-04-19 18:14   ` Pedro Alves
2017-05-01  2:22     ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-05-04 15:30       ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-14 19:22 ` [PATCH v4] " Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-06-16 15:45   ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-16 18:01     ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-06-16 18:23       ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-16 21:59         ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-06-16 22:23 ` [PATCH v5] " Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-06-17  8:54   ` Simon Marchi
2017-06-19  4:19     ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-06-19 13:40       ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-19 16:19         ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-06-19 12:13     ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-20 14:02       ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-19  4:36 ` [PATCH v6] " Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-06-19  4:51   ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-06-19  7:18     ` Simon Marchi
2017-06-19 14:26       ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-19 15:30         ` Simon Marchi
2017-06-19 15:44           ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-19 15:47             ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-19 16:26             ` Simon Marchi
2017-06-19 16:55               ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-19 17:59                 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-06-19 18:09                   ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-19 18:23                     ` Sergio Durigan Junior [this message]
2017-06-19 18:36                       ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-19 18:38                         ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-19 14:26   ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-19 16:13     ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-06-19 16:38       ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-19 16:46         ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-06-19 18:27 ` [PATCH v7] " Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-06-20  3:27 ` [PATCH v8] " Sergio Durigan Junior
2017-06-20 12:13   ` Pedro Alves
2017-06-20 12:46   ` Simon Marchi
2017-06-20 13:00     ` Sergio Durigan Junior

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87lgonx2dg.fsf@redhat.com \
    --to=sergiodj@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=palves@redhat.com \
    --cc=simon.marchi@polymtl.ca \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox