From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31674 invoked by alias); 13 Apr 2012 18:16:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 31659 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Apr 2012 18:16:23 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-vb0-f41.google.com (HELO mail-vb0-f41.google.com) (209.85.212.41) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 18:16:09 +0000 Received: by vbbey12 with SMTP id ey12so2814856vbb.0 for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 11:16:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record:x-gm-message-state; bh=xTi2MYZ0Qve96MWtlsB+DIxqlfgf4MLboDQlUwFHOZk=; b=EdfPKLpqUayD2oCqGDV9xR5aHmrOsrL4/pFR2I9Pnm9UgPXh7GcQS4yo5kWdpX67mT qmxmnPFrCIpwP6UYcUnnBveoZc6GGal5JPwYs/0GVVEBX9bgB8kqx0GcwLiHebWY+bvE zQlT9uS7PPEjgN6oLZ35T9Aakuz9kv5r/rfJeBaqp7eyI+Jm++R3q4zT2e07DCpV9y0A 24GQw6iRWrR43lMzPcwTDu3XE/B4/zw0vDiLkAoGWOo6B1YhkWpA+P2pqNJaXAtSlYRZ I1xvofYsiW1jQmc06orf7wzDUbK22YmQSIzwPqB1Nn49XZB7q5k5LkyCOumutDcndXok bDpQ== Received: by 10.52.72.130 with SMTP id d2mr1003604vdv.80.1334340969115; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 11:16:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.72.130 with SMTP id d2mr1003599vdv.80.1334340969023; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 11:16:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.7.66 with HTTP; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 11:16:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87obqvwmay.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> References: <20120413072548.EAA5F2461B3@ruffy.mtv.corp.google.com> <87iph3y39k.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <87obqvwmay.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 19:46:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC] Fission patch 1/2 From: Doug Evans To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-System-Of-Record: true X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkVuvq9B/zjWlthZnbxquZG7suj7Vk+L9bmkDJgtqLo4XBzcrKIjmsUdkNzLNTohuVmDZm434Z/gZ9G3+ylQpVqQeOyzb0bJKWxKeeYAUUPVd2eviZZNT9iE9taGyOZ0zVN+CZtrTfNHX5OR1V7kKMNJnVYWA== X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2012-04/txt/msg00381.txt.bz2 On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Tom Tromey wrote: > Though I'd still prefer that most > code not play games with cleanups at all and just treat them as > block-scoped as much as possible. cleanups are chained, and one has to always be cognizant of the chain (in a not-entirely intuitive fashion IMO, though I understand the implementation reasons for it). I think there's value in a cleanup mechanism where one didn't have to be cognizant of the chain, or at least be less cognizant (whether that's completely possible, I don't know). [btw, I don't know if I'd color it as "playing games" ...]