This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: type/main_type/field size [Re: [patch] static_kind -> bit0, bit1]
- From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- To: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>, Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 23:31:25 -0400
- Subject: Re: type/main_type/field size [Re: [patch] static_kind -> bit0, bit1]
- References: <20080818111120.GE16894@adacore.com> <200808181553.m7IFrG3w005270@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> <48A59B3C.9050801@net-b.de> <20080818111120.GE16894@adacore.com> <20080907115637.GA12939@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20080919221221.GA23372@adacore.com> <20080926125754.GC21287@caradoc.them.org> <20081006200928.GD3588@adacore.com> <20081007232111.GA6913@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net>
> > I think it is kind of ugly, and i tried to think about it for a while,
> > but I don't see many possible solutions if we don't want to increase
> > the gdbtype struct size.
>
> BTW are there some measurements if sizeof (type / main_type / field)
> matters?
Once in a while, Tom will post some numbers with each of his size
improvements. He worked pretty hard at reducing the sizes by some
bytes, so I'd like to know what he thinks of the increase before
adding a pointer back (4-8 bytes).
(2MB seems like a small and reasonable increase to me)
--
Joel