[review v3] Replace some more qsort calls with std::sort

Christian Biesinger (Code Review)
2019-10-21T16:22:52Z

Christian Biesinger has posted comments on this change.

Change URL: https://gnutoolchain-gerrit.osci.io/r/c/binutils-gdb/+/131
......................................................................

Patch Set 3:

> Patch Set 3:
>
> It looks like this patch causes some regressions when building with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG=1. One such failure is in gdb.dwarf2/ada-linkage-name.exp (make check TESTS="gdb.dwarf2/ada-linkage-name.exp").
>
> The problem is that the comparison functions don't have the required properties for std::sort:
>
> 49 /usr/include/c++/9.2.0/bits/stl_algo.h:4858:^M
> 50 In function:^M
> 51 void std::sort(_RAIter, _RAIter, _Compare) [with _RAIter = ^M
> 52 obj_section**; _Compare = bool (*)(const obj_section*, const ^M
> 53 obj_section*)]^M
> 54 ^M
> 55 Error: comparison doesn't meet irreflexive requirements, assert(!(a < a)).^M
> 56 ^M
> 57 Objects involved in the operation:^M
> 58 instance "functor" @ 0x0x7ffda9ccc9a0 {^M
> 59 type = bool (*)(obj_section const*, obj_section const*);^M
> 60 }^M
> 61 iterator::value_type "ordered type" {^M
> 62 type = obj_section*;^M
> 63 }^M
>
> It is probably a pre-existing bad behavior with the comparison functions, but using std::sort points those out.
>
> I would encourage you to use -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG=1 all the time for your development builds (except for when you want to do benchmarks), it catches a bunch of things.

Thanks for finding this! I will make sure to use that define. Meanwhile aburgess uploaded a patch to fix this: https://gnutoolchain-gerrit.osci.io/r/c/binutils-gdb/+/177