This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch 0/4] varobj_list replacement [Re: [patch 4/8] Types GC [varobj_list to all_root_varobjs]]
>>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> writes:
Volodya> Can we just make varobj.c expose vector of varobjs?
Jan> In general iterators are preferred over direct variable access in
Jan> modern programming.
Yeah, but what about in gdb? ;)
Jan> Still I would prefer:
Jan> Iterator - so-called "safe" (keeping the next pointer) double link list:
This patch (assuming it was the 4/4 patch) seemed pretty clean to me.
I did not read all the patches. I'm happy to do so and review them, but
I didn't want to overstep into Volodya's maintainership area.
Jan> Regression tested all the 4 patches on {x86_64,i686}-fedora-linux-gnu.
So, I have a few comments on this.
I understand from other mail that this patch is a prerequisite to the
type GC work. However, I don't understand in what way it is needed. I
probably missed something... could you either explain it or tell me
where to look?
Second, I did not see a response to any of these patches. So, ping.
Third, I think it is strange to send four patches that do the same thing
in different ways. I am certain that we can all communicate better than
this, and come to an agreement about direction beforehand.
Tom