From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jim Blandy To: Daniel Berlin Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: More on DWARF2 Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 09:50:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <87k815bizp.fsf@cgsoftware.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg00281.html Daniel Berlin writes: > You're proposing something that is about 75% of the work of what i've > done. > However, it requires *more* memory than we currently use, because it > would mean retaining more info, with no real way to distinguish the > lifetimes of the info. > I actually started by doing that, and then noticed we might as well > just modularize it the whole way, and keep all the info about a given > compilation unit, in a structure for that compilation unit, so we > could throw it out when that compilation unit was done. > You are proposing something that still keeps around the global > variables, etc. > It's the difference between 2 months, and 2 and a half months, of > coding. I figured since the original design had come back > to bite us in the ass, I might as well do what I could to prevent it > from happening again, and if it did happen, to make it so pieces could > be reused without so much pain and suffering. That seems reasonable. I know it sounds otherwise, but I'm not so much proposing an alternative approach as checking my understanding of the issues. > Unless, of course, you start introducing more global variables to > communicate state, which IMHO, is a bad idea. I agree.