[PATCH] Use an std::vector for inline_states
Simon Marchi
simon.marchi@polymtl.ca
Mon Apr 9 19:45:00 GMT 2018
On 2018-04-09 05:10, Pedro Alves wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I remembered now that I forgot so point at something that I had wanted
> to mention before.
>
> It's that I think that this:
>
>> +template <typename T>
>> +T
>> +unordered_remove (std::vector<T> &vec, typename
>> std::vector<T>::iterator it)
>> +{
>
> won't work as is with gdb::def_vector/gdb::byte_vector, because the
> above
> assumes std::vector has a single template parameter, while in reality
> it
> has two.
>
> I think this can either be fixed by adding an allocator template
> parameter
> to unordered_remove:
>
> template<typename T, typename A>
> void
> unordered_erase (std::vector<T, A> &v,
> typename std::vector<T, A>::iterator pos)
>
> or by making the whole vector/container type a template like in
> my example:
>
> template<typename Vector>
> void
> unordered_erase (Vector &v, typename Vector::iterator pos)
That sounds like a good change, but let's do it as a separate patch (as
renaming the functions).
I was wondering if it would also be worthwhile to have an equivalent of
std::remove_if that doesn't preserve the order of the remaining elements
(which could have been used in this patch).
I pushed my patch in, including the missing usage of unordered_remove
that you pointed out in your other message.
Thanks,
Simon
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list