From: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
To: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] Class-fy partial_die_info
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 16:19:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87vafphpw6.fsf@tromey.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1516873114-7449-5-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> (Yao Qi's message of "Thu, 25 Jan 2018 09:38:31 +0000")
>>>>> "Yao" == Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com> writes:
Yao> @@ -18353,7 +18392,8 @@ load_partial_dies (const struct die_reader_specs *reader,
Yao> struct partial_die_info *part_die
Yao> = XOBNEW (&cu->comp_unit_obstack, struct partial_die_info);
Yao> - memcpy (part_die, &pdi, sizeof (pdi));
Yao> + part_die = new (part_die) partial_die_info (pdi);
Yao> +
I wonder if it would make sense to have an "operator new" implementation
that allocates directly on an obstack. It could use
std::is_trivially_destructible to enforce the rule that objects on an
obstack can't really be destroyed. This would eliminate the separate
XOBNEW, which is maybe a potential source of errors; and would also make
it harder to accidentally add a destructor to objects allocated this way.
Tom
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-25 16:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-25 9:38 [PATCH 0/7] " Yao Qi
2018-01-25 9:38 ` [PATCH 3/7] Change find_partial_die_in_comp_unit to dwarf2_cu::find_partial_die Yao Qi
2018-01-25 9:38 ` [PATCH 4/7] Class-fy partial_die_info Yao Qi
2018-01-25 16:19 ` Tom Tromey [this message]
2018-01-26 17:25 ` Yao Qi
2018-01-26 20:55 ` Tom Tromey
2018-01-29 1:15 ` Simon Marchi
2018-01-30 10:49 ` Yao Qi
2018-01-30 15:11 ` Pedro Alves
2018-01-30 11:39 ` Pedro Alves
2018-01-31 3:46 ` Simon Marchi
2018-01-31 11:55 ` Yao Qi
2018-01-31 15:33 ` Pedro Alves
2018-01-25 9:38 ` [PATCH 2/7] Don't check abbrev is NULL in read_partial_die Yao Qi
2018-01-25 9:38 ` [PATCH 7/7] Move read_partial_die to partial_die_info::read Yao Qi
2018-01-29 1:58 ` Simon Marchi
2018-01-25 9:38 ` [PATCH 5/7] Remove one argument abbrev_len in read_partial_die Yao Qi
2018-01-29 1:30 ` Simon Marchi
2018-01-25 9:38 ` [PATCH 6/7] Move fixup_partial_die to partial_die_info::fixup Yao Qi
2018-01-25 12:59 ` Pedro Alves
2018-01-25 14:45 ` Yao Qi
2018-01-25 9:38 ` [PATCH 1/7] Re-write partial_die_info allocation in load_partial_dies Yao Qi
2018-01-25 12:05 ` [PATCH 0/7] Class-fy partial_die_info Joel Brobecker
2018-01-25 14:03 ` Yao Qi
2018-02-22 15:36 [PATCH 0/7 v2] " Yao Qi
2018-02-22 15:36 ` [PATCH 4/7] " Yao Qi
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=87vafphpw6.fsf@tromey.com \
--to=tom@tromey.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=qiyaoltc@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).