From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
To: David Carlton <carlton@math.stanford.edu>
Cc: gdb <gdb@sources.redhat.com>, Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>,
Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [rfc] struct dictionary
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 15:10:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3EAE95CD.8070207@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ro1znmf8a9g.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU>
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 11:31:35 -0400, Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com> said:
>
>
>> Ok, humor me ...
>> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2003-04/msg00017.html why even
>> build these data structures during symbol reading? It takes time
>> and space, yet is probably never used. Why not on-demand build this
>> dictionary specialized for the block?
>
>
> That sounds great to me if we can get it to work. It's certainly
> another reason to try to get the symbol lookup stuff abstracted behind
> an opaque interface: it makes lazy loading of data a lot easier.
But which interface?
A block has a language, and [I think] it's the language that, in the end
decides that block's name->symbol lookup strategy. The language can, on
demand, build a dictionary for its block.
> About the mdebugread stuff: personally, I don't care about it in the
> slightest, so I'm happy for its performance to degrade, and it seems
> little-enough used that a 2x degradation is perfectly acceptable.
> After all, if anybody really cares about it, there's an easy fix:
> buildsym-ify it, so that it uses the same mechanisms everybody else
> does. Having said that, I've already done the work on my branch to
> convert it to an efficient dictionary mechanism (using a combination
> of hashed and unsorted linear representations); it really wasn't all
> that much work.
The alternative being simplify it, and then let the Java/C++ languages
implement the searching schema that they need.
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-04-29 15:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-16 20:05 David Carlton
2003-04-25 2:17 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-04-25 2:22 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-25 4:35 ` David Carlton
2003-04-25 15:31 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-04-25 16:38 ` David Carlton
2003-05-01 23:09 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-05-10 18:09 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-06-03 2:20 ` Elena Zannoni
2003-06-03 3:00 ` David Carlton
2003-04-29 15:10 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2003-04-29 19:16 ` David Carlton
2003-04-29 20:06 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-04-29 20:39 ` David Carlton
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=3EAE95CD.8070207@redhat.com \
--to=ac131313@redhat.com \
--cc=carlton@math.stanford.edu \
--cc=ezannoni@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=jimb@redhat.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).