This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [rfc] struct dictionary
On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 11:31:35 -0400, Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com> said:
Ok, humor me ...
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2003-04/msg00017.html why even
build these data structures during symbol reading? It takes time
and space, yet is probably never used. Why not on-demand build this
dictionary specialized for the block?
That sounds great to me if we can get it to work. It's certainly
another reason to try to get the symbol lookup stuff abstracted behind
an opaque interface: it makes lazy loading of data a lot easier.
But which interface?
A block has a language, and [I think] it's the language that, in the end
decides that block's name->symbol lookup strategy. The language can, on
demand, build a dictionary for its block.
About the mdebugread stuff: personally, I don't care about it in the
slightest, so I'm happy for its performance to degrade, and it seems
little-enough used that a 2x degradation is perfectly acceptable.
After all, if anybody really cares about it, there's an easy fix:
buildsym-ify it, so that it uses the same mechanisms everybody else
does. Having said that, I've already done the work on my branch to
convert it to an efficient dictionary mechanism (using a combination
of hashed and unsorted linear representations); it really wasn't all
that much work.
The alternative being simplify it, and then let the Java/C++ languages
implement the searching schema that they need.