This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH v4] gdb: ADI support
- From: jose dot marchesi at oracle dot com (Jose E. Marchesi)
- To: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Weimin Pan <weimin dot pan at oracle dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 17:31:11 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] gdb: ADI support
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1500424890-112103-1-git-send-email-weimin.pan@oracle.com> <86o9s8pmyg.fsf@gmail.com>
> +/* Per-process ADI stat info. */
> +
> +struct sparc64_adi_info
> +{
> + /* The process identifier. */
> + pid_t pid;
> +
> + /* The ADI stat. */
> + struct adi_stat_t stat;
> +
> + /* Linked list. */
> + struct sparc64_adi_info *next;
> +};
Use C++ STL list. I suggested it on the v3 review.
General question: what's wrong with using a simple linked list of
structs if that is the developer's preference, and/or it follows the
current style of the surrounding code? (Not saying it is in this case,
that's up to Weimin to say.)
As far as I can see the usage of STL is not mandated by the GDB coding
standards (as documented in the wiki) and developers may want to avoid
them in many circumstances.