From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id iKkNG+rM8V9RAwAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 03 Jan 2021 08:55:54 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 613B81F0AA; Sun, 3 Jan 2021 08:55:54 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham 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 6BCC51E552 for ; Sun, 3 Jan 2021 08:55:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D6993851C31; Sun, 3 Jan 2021 13:55:52 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 9D6993851C31 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1609682152; bh=J+ynYcQ5SklDCdwCs+uhVSLOZx+MHgLcK6RLmZ1N/BY=; h=Subject:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=bJ9bqcoMTXGEG4WQrLrpxd77bZxxj+OniUPRJSxsBGA4QtfQkwglKStBrHeE4ppkY Ah3s6g9KW26scMpE3DKRWMIqRD/GuBzWHBSdfiQdxKsvUDUpdkXPHvq78K5N6jn+xX +r469uLLxLPnp4bLku5FSf0RktiWFYMOTAj5stdE= Received: from beryx.lancelotsix.com (beryx.lancelotsix.com [IPv6:2001:41d0:401:3000::1ab3]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 188D73851C31 for ; Sun, 3 Jan 2021 13:55:49 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 188D73851C31 Received: from [IPv6:2a02:390:8443:0:25cc:858b:abf5:ff7d] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:390:8443:0:25cc:858b:abf5:ff7d]) by beryx.lancelotsix.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7B8462E070; Sun, 3 Jan 2021 14:55:47 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [PATCH 073/203] Introduce class operation To: Joel Brobecker , Tom Tromey References: <20210101214723.1784144-1-tom@tromey.com> <20210101214723.1784144-74-tom@tromey.com> <20210103070912.GA363503@adacore.com> Message-ID: Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2021 13:55:46 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210103070912.GA363503@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.11 (beryx.lancelotsix.com [0.0.0.0]); Sun, 03 Jan 2021 14:55:47 +0100 (CET) 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: , From: Lancelot SIX via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Lancelot SIX Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" Hi everyone On 03/01/2021 07:09, Joel Brobecker wrote: > Hi Tom, > >> * ax-gdb.c (operation::generate_ax): New method. > Thanks for this! > > I don't have much comment to share on this, at least not just yet > until I have had a chance to see this new API in action in the rest > of the patch series. I do have one small-tiny-mini suggestion: > > It's about: > >> +typedef std::unique_ptr operation_up; > FWIW, the connection between "up" and the rest of the declaration > wasn't immediately obvious to me. I think this is because "up" > is an english word, and spelled like that, all in lowercase, > that's really what my brain keeps analyzing it as first. It takes > an effort to adjust my thinking against this bias. > > It's not a problem for me if we decide to keep this like that, > but what do you think about about renaming this to something like > "operation_uptr"? I think it'll make the intention more immediately > clear to the reader. > I am fairly new to this codebase, but as far as I can say, this sort of naming convention (the _up suffix for a typedefed std::unique_ptr) is already used here and there: $ git grep 'typedef std::unique_ptr.*_up;'|wc -l 33 I have to admin that the first time I came across it it was not obvious to me either, but it would make sense to keep it this way for consistency (I guess). BR Lancelot.