From: David Carlton <carlton@kealia.com>
To: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFA] Per-objfile data mechanism
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 16:48:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <yf24r1nn3c0.fsf@hawaii.kealia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030715161729.GA32437@nevyn.them.org> (Daniel Jacobowitz's message of "Tue, 15 Jul 2003 12:17:29 -0400")
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 12:17:29 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> said:
> The concept is nice, but I share David's concern.
I'm not sure what my concern is; I'm just curious. :-) I guess my
inchoate attitude (as an interested observer who has a patch waiting
for approval that adds per-objfile data) is that I don't mind at all
adding new data to every objfile: there just aren't enough of them to
worry about. The advantage of doing that as a member is that its
existence is right there in objfiles.h for anybody to look at. The
advantage of Mark's mechanism is that, if the data is only used by
one file, then you don't have to clutter objfiles.h with it.
I was also going to write, based on a cursory misreading of Mark's
patch, that it simplified memory management in some circumstances, but
now that I look at it more closely, I think I just misread the patch.
(I may still be misreading the patch; my head is spinning with other
things.) Would it be possible/beneficial to modify the mechanism to
provide an optional per-datum cleanup function as well?
David Carlton
carlton@kealia.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-15 16:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-13 17:17 Mark Kettenis
2003-07-15 15:55 ` David Carlton
2003-07-15 16:17 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-07-15 16:48 ` David Carlton [this message]
2003-07-15 17:27 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-08-10 19:03 ` Mark Kettenis
2003-08-11 15:45 ` David Carlton
2003-08-12 20:08 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-08-12 20:51 ` David Carlton
2003-08-21 22:42 ` Mark Kettenis
2003-09-07 4:26 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-08-13 20:54 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-07-15 17:14 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-07-15 20:00 ` Elena Zannoni
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=yf24r1nn3c0.fsf@hawaii.kealia.com \
--to=carlton@kealia.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=kettenis@chello.nl \
/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