From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-170800-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 23801 invoked by alias); 20 Oct 2011 15:14:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 23790 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Oct 2011 15:14:08 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.4 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (HELO mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr) (192.134.164.105)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 15:13:54 +0000
Received: from ip-133.net-81-220-116.brest.rev.numericable.fr (HELO laptop-mg.local) ([81.220.116.133])  by mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 20 Oct 2011 17:13:50 +0200
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 15:34:00 -0000
From: Marc Glisse <marc.glisse@inria.fr>
Reply-To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
To: Basile Starynkevitch <basile@starynkevitch.net>
cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: adding destroyable objects into Ggc
In-Reply-To: <20111020085324.GA12472@ours.starynkevitch.net>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1110201708080.2378@laptop-mg.saclay.inria.fr>
References: <20111018171201.361304028ab94f102f827bd2@starynkevitch.net> <mcr62jm5kcb.fsf@coign.corp.google.com> <20111018191350.470cd6b1cd291373d5ff3f2c@starynkevitch.net> <CAPOVtOvJ74c2rHx5JSkUjo8HGrHnnhBdAq8O8bf-e=FeSQrQFw@mail.gmail.com> <CAGqM8fZeHym4nKF-RixukW1G+C5K1iUHHHEg1yA+tG-K1_jtyA@mail.gmail.com> <20111020080753.a895eae452bb25e312ebf617@starynkevitch.net> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1110200903470.2398@laptop-mg.saclay.inria.fr> <20111020081245.GA12085@ours.starynkevitch.net> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1110201031180.3550@stedding.saclay.inria.fr> <20111020085324.GA12472@ours.starynkevitch.net>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-10/txt/msg00358.txt.bz2

On Thu, 20 Oct 2011, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:

> Suppose someone is coding a new plugin, which adds several passes to GCC (so
> need the data to be managed by Ggc, because it is not internal to one single
> pass.). Suppose the plugin is coded in C++, and that it uses some standard
> C++ collection (e.g. std::vector or std::map) of C++ objects mixing pointers
> to GTY-ed data (e.g. gimple) and PPL instances (in C++). The data used by
> the plugin would better be GTY-ed. And it points to both GTY-ed & PPL data,
> so need to be finalized.

Can't you use GTY-ed memory in PPL? Sorry for the naive question, but 
std::vector can take an allocator parameter, gmp lets you specify an 
allocation function...

(note that I have never looked at Ggc so my question may be off...)

-- 
Marc Glisse