From: Doug Evans <xdje42@gmail.com>
To: Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com>
Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] struct symtab split part 1: buildsym api cleanup
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 02:13:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAP9bCMSDDgeYn8L1tF-WzVLtxEmrppOXckROggXC4GMJJ8-toA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87h9xyha3c.fsf@codesourcery.com>
On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> Doug Evans <xdje42@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I realize there are a lot of globals in buildsym.c, and I'm not trying
>> to get rid of them in this patch set, but if one thinks of
>> buildsym as an object and start_symtab as a constructor,
>> then there's no need to pass the compilation directory to
>> start_subfile, and there's no need to pass objfile to end_symtab*.
>> This patch applies these changes.
>
> Hi Doug,
> I am worried about adding new static variables in buildsym.c. Why do
> you have to the change like this? because part 2 needs such updated api?
Whether something is "needed" can be debatable, but the intent here is
to lay the groundwork for part 2.
The static globals get moved into a struct that contains some of the
buildsym state in part 2.
> I can't estimate the date that buildsym is rewritten as an object in
> c++, so in foreseeable future, the structure of buildsym still remains
> nearly unchanged, I assume. Adding static variables runes in the opposite
> direction, IMO. Secondly, shouldn't be buildsym a stateless processor,
> which gets objfile as input and ouputs symbols? In this way, isn't it
> nicer to have argument objfile for the api? I don't know much on
> buildsym, so I may miss something.
I understand where you're coming from.
The way I look at it, buildsym is what it is.
It's not where I want it to be, but OTOH cleaning it up is a lower
priority than other things.
This patch actually heads in the right direction because the API of
buildsym becomes more what I want it to be (not entirely so, just more
so).
I don't mind a few internal (local to buildsym.c) steps "backwards" in
the process.
Plus as mentioned above these static globals disappear in part 2.
Note that buildsym has a *lot* of global state. Some of it is hidden
because of the EXTERN hack that is used in buildsym.h.
Cleaning up buildsym is a significant cleanup project in itself, but
it's also entirely local to buildsym.c and the debug info readers,
whereas cleaning up the symtab data structures provides a lot more
benefit. Ergo deferring cleaning up buildsym.[ch] until after struct
symtab and symbol lookup is improved.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-17 2:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-12 4:28 Doug Evans
2014-11-17 1:47 ` Yao Qi
2014-11-17 2:13 ` Doug Evans [this message]
2014-11-17 2:58 ` Yao Qi
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=CAP9bCMSDDgeYn8L1tF-WzVLtxEmrppOXckROggXC4GMJJ8-toA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=xdje42@gmail.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=yao@codesourcery.com \
/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