From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20188 invoked by alias); 19 Oct 2016 17:45:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 20095 invoked by uid 89); 19 Oct 2016 17:45:42 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 17:45:40 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CE9EC056790; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 17:45:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u9JHjcWf017926; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 13:45:38 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 31/31] Support an "unlimited" number of user-defined arguments To: Philipp Rudo , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <1476839539-8374-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <1476839539-8374-32-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <20161019133349.2bc6ccf2@ThinkPad> <35a899f9-9014-3b1f-8b12-e807ed290caa@redhat.com> <20161019193927.09aebd85@ThinkPad> From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <26e622e9-f8bb-3ea5-87a3-cceb308664ea@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 17:45:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20161019193927.09aebd85@ThinkPad> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00577.txt.bz2 On 10/19/2016 06:39 PM, Philipp Rudo wrote: > Pedro Alves wrote: >>>> I also needed a way to convert a number to a std::string, so I added a >>>> new utility for that, gdb::to_string. Yet another thing that can go >>>> away with C++11. >>> [... snip ...] >>>> +/* Returns a string representation of VAL. Replacement for >>>> + std::to_string, which is only available in C++11 or later. */ >>> Is this really necessary? >>> As far as I understood the discussion, we jump directly to C++11. Thus there is no need for an homemade to_string. >> >> We haven't actually officially committed to requiring >> C++11, so I didn't want to be blocked by that. It's >> trivial to remove that bit latter if this lands first. > > True that C++11 is not official yet. But the "trivial to remove" is > exactly the reason I wrote, as those pieces of code tend to stay in the longest. > And in 10+ years nobody knows why there is such a messy mix of different > functions doing the same thing and why it hasn't been done right in the > first place ;) Well, in this case the comment leaves no doubt. :-) > > So my mail should not push you to use std::to_string but be seen as a reminder, > that if we require C++11 your home made function should be deleted better sooner > than later. Agreed. If this lands first, I'll make sure to remove this piece after C++11. Thanks, Pedro Alves