public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
To: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>,
	       Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com>,
	Oleg Endo <oleg.endo@t-online.de>,
	       Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com>,
	gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: protected alloca class for malloc fallback
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2016 17:00:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <21bcbebe-28a8-58a7-68e8-af9abcb03dce@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <941D179C-146F-4004-BECB-9FB066DDCC8D@gmail.com>

On 08/06/2016 09:08 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On August 6, 2016 12:15:26 PM GMT+02:00, Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 08/05/2016 04:07 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On August 5, 2016 8:15:54 PM GMT+02:00, Oleg Endo
>> <oleg.endo@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 2016-08-05 at 19:55 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please don't use std::string.  For string building you can use
>>>>> obstacks.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just out of curiosity ... why?  I remember there was some discussion
>>>> about it, what was the conclusion?  Is that now a general rule or
>> does
>>>> it depend on the context where strings are used?
>>>
>>> Because you make a messy mix of string handling variants.
>> Std::string is not powerful enough to capture all uses, it is vastly
>> more expensive to embed into structs and it pulls in too much headers.
>>> (Oh, and I hate I/o streams even more)
>>
>> Oh, and there is prior use in ipa-chkp.c, although I suppose it
>> could've
>> crept in:
>
> Definitely.
>
>>
>>   std::string s;
>>
>>   /* called_as_built_in checks DECL_NAME to identify calls to
>>      builtins.  We want instrumented calls to builtins to be
>>      recognized by called_as_built_in.  Therefore use original
>>      DECL_NAME for cloning with no prefixes.  */
>>   s = IDENTIFIER_POINTER (DECL_NAME (fndecl));
>>   s += ".chkp";
>>   DECL_NAME (new_decl) = get_identifier (s.c_str ());
>>
>> You can't tell me obstacks are easier on the eyes for this ;-).
>
> Even strcat is shorter and cheaper.
ISTM that unless the code is performance critical we should be writing 
code that is easy to understand and hard to get wrong.

Thus when we have something that is non-critical and can be handled by 
std:: routines we should be using them.

If performance is important in a particular piece of code an obstack or 
explicit malloc/free seems better.

Can we agree on those as guiding principles and thus boil the argument 
down to whether or not a particular piece of code is performance critical?

jeff

  reply	other threads:[~2016-08-08 17:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-08-04 11:30 Aldy Hernandez
2016-08-04 12:58 ` Richard Biener
2016-08-04 15:19   ` Aldy Hernandez
2016-08-04 19:24     ` Jeff Law
2016-08-05 14:37       ` Aldy Hernandez
2016-08-05 15:15         ` Pedro Alves
2016-08-05 16:23         ` Jeff Law
2016-08-05 17:48           ` Richard Biener
2016-08-05  8:17     ` Richard Biener
2016-08-04 19:06 ` Pedro Alves
2016-08-04 19:16   ` Jeff Law
2016-08-04 19:22     ` Pedro Alves
2016-08-04 19:26       ` Jeff Law
2016-08-04 19:31         ` Pedro Alves
2016-08-05  2:10 ` Martin Sebor
2016-08-05 14:42   ` Aldy Hernandez
2016-08-05 17:56     ` Richard Biener
2016-08-05 18:16       ` Oleg Endo
2016-08-05 20:07         ` Richard Biener
2016-08-06 10:09           ` Aldy Hernandez
2016-08-06 10:15           ` Aldy Hernandez
2016-08-06 15:08             ` Richard Biener
2016-08-08 17:00               ` Jeff Law [this message]
2016-08-08 17:32                 ` Trevor Saunders
2016-08-08 19:03                   ` Richard Biener
2016-08-09 11:34                   ` Oleg Endo
2016-08-09 17:34                     ` Trevor Saunders
2016-08-10 17:03                       ` Oleg Endo
2016-08-11  1:23                         ` Trevor Saunders
2016-08-11 12:18                           ` Oleg Endo
2016-08-11 17:55                             ` Trevor Saunders
2016-08-20  2:29                         ` Mike Stump
2016-08-21 20:00                           ` C++11? (Re: protected alloca class for malloc fallback) Pedro Alves
2016-08-22  7:10                             ` Trevor Saunders
2016-08-22  7:28                               ` Richard Biener
2016-08-22 12:02                             ` Eric Gallager
2016-08-22 12:58                               ` Manuel López-Ibáñez
2016-08-22 22:08                               ` Mike Stump
2016-08-23 23:17                                 ` Eric Gallager
2016-08-09 13:17       ` protected alloca class for malloc fallback Aldy Hernandez
2016-08-09 13:21         ` Bernd Schmidt
2016-08-10 10:04         ` Richard Biener
2016-08-10 10:12           ` Aldy Hernandez
2016-08-10 10:39             ` Richard Biener
2016-08-10 18:00           ` Jeff Law
2016-08-10 18:33             ` Richard Biener
2016-08-16 16:28               ` Jeff Law
2016-08-16 16:44                 ` Jakub Jelinek
2016-08-16 16:47                   ` Jeff Law
2016-08-16 17:54                     ` Martin Sebor
2016-08-17  8:27                       ` Richard Biener
2016-08-17 13:39                         ` Martin Sebor

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=21bcbebe-28a8-58a7-68e8-af9abcb03dce@redhat.com \
    --to=law@redhat.com \
    --cc=aldyh@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=msebor@gmail.com \
    --cc=oleg.endo@t-online.de \
    --cc=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).