From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 118880 invoked by alias); 19 Oct 2016 22:36:52 -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 118866 invoked by uid 89); 19 Oct 2016 22:36:52 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=doublechecking, double-checking 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 22:36:51 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) (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 255738553E; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 22:36:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u9JMamuZ023595; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 18:36:49 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/31] 'struct expression *' -> gdb::unique_xmalloc_ptr To: Simon Marchi References: <1476839539-8374-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <1476839539-8374-6-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <05400b5dcac7409b4ccf1fc91733e848@simark.ca> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <7493324b-1989-8676-d75b-32741147e6c2@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 22:36:00 -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: <05400b5dcac7409b4ccf1fc91733e848@simark.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00590.txt.bz2 On 10/19/2016 11:25 PM, Simon Marchi wrote: > On 2016-10-19 17:50, Pedro Alves wrote: >>> I did a quick grep for various converted struct names allocation >>> keywords, I see there is still a >>> >>> bp_location = XNEWVEC (struct bp_location *, bp_location_count); >>> >>> Does that need to be converted too? >> >> You mean converted to "new"? No, because that is an array >> of pointers, not array of bp_location objects. > > Oh right I missed that, sorry. No worries. Thanks much for double-checking for missing conversions like this, and for reviewing the patch in the first place. Thanks, Pedro Alves