From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id iNZ1MIYKfl9oUAAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 07 Oct 2020 14:35:50 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id C451A1EF79; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 14:35:50 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75F061E58D for ; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 14:35:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D573D385781C; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 18:35:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rock.gnat.com (rock.gnat.com [IPv6:2620:20:4000:0:a9e:1ff:fe9b:1d1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 000CF3858D35 for ; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 18:35:46 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 000CF3858D35 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=adacore.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=tromey@adacore.com Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2B33117C70; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 14:35:46 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id QxKmrstcOlXN; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 14:35:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from murgatroyd (174-16-122-38.hlrn.qwest.net [174.16.122.38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7521F117C6E; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 14:35:46 -0400 (EDT) From: Tom Tromey To: Simon Marchi Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Use obstack in ada_encode_1 References: <20201002202604.1517475-1-tromey@adacore.com> <20201002202604.1517475-3-tromey@adacore.com> <2d52a731-17e4-4a8f-0916-9a2203b0c94d@simark.ca> X-Attribution: Tom Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2020 12:35:45 -0600 In-Reply-To: <2d52a731-17e4-4a8f-0916-9a2203b0c94d@simark.ca> (Simon Marchi's message of "Fri, 2 Oct 2020 17:54:00 -0400") Message-ID: <87o8ldopdq.fsf@tromey.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Tom Tromey Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" >>>>> "Simon" == Simon Marchi writes: Simon> I think the same could be achieved using a static std::string instead of Simon> an obstack, and it would be a bit more C++-y, but either way is fine Simon> with me. Yeah, actually it is probably a better API to simply return a new string. I avoided this since I wasn't sure about why the function is the way it is -- is it to avoid the difficulties of managing an allocation in C, or is it to avoid extra allocations? But I looked at the callers and I think it will be fine. Tom