public inbox for gdb@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
To: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
Cc: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>, gdb@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Will therefore GDB utilize C++ or not?
Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 18:11:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FBA6D04.7060804@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8762cwpz3u.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>

On 04/18/2012 09:24 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:

> Pedro> Even RAII is not _that_ different from cleanups.
> 
> No, it really is.  It is not dynamic, and you don't have to remember to
> call do_cleanups on all exit paths.


Cleanups are dynamic because they're been crafted that way.
We could tweak cleanups to allow creating them on the stack.

What I meant by not that different, is, that with RAII you get
to write something like (the dumbest version of a RAII object
that supports canceling possible):

class my_raii_thing
{
private:
   whatever_arg *arg; << moral equivalent of the cleanup args.
   bool discarded;

public:
   my_raii_thing (whatever_arg *p) : arg (p), discarded(false)
   {}

   ~my_raii_thing () << moral equivalent of a cleanup function.
   {
      if (!discarded)
        {
          // whatever to release this->arg or something like that.
        }
   }

   void discard ()
   {
      discarded = true;
   }
};

and then do:

  my_raii_thing foo (&whatever_arg);

  if (whatnot)
    {
       whatever_arg.discard();
       return SUCESS;
    }
  }

whereas we now write:

struct cleanup_args
{
  ...
};

void foo_cleanup (void *arg)
{
   // whatever to release this->arg or something like that.
}

and then:

  old_chain = make_cleanup (foo_cleanup, &whatever_arg);

  if (whatnot)
    {
       discard_cleanups (old_chain);
       return SUCESS;
    }
  do_cleanup (old_chain);

But yes, as I've said before elsewhere, give me destructors,
everything else I can live without.  :-)

Basically, whoever understands RAII should understand cleanups.
Not counting the auto-destruction issue, I'm saying that writing
raii classes vs writing cleanup function is mostly syntax sugar.

> 
> I've fixed any number of memory (and, IIRC, file descriptor) leaks
> caused precisely because cleanups are less good than RAII.
> 
> Basically, with cleanups the default is full generality, but this is
> wrong.  With RAII the default is block scoping, and you have to expend
> effort to do weird stuff.


We could make make_cleanup return a reference to this instead of to the
previous (as Doug suggested not long ago), and tweak cleanups to make
it possible to have them on the stack, making their use follow scope
closer too.

-- 
Pedro Alves

  reply	other threads:[~2012-05-21 18:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 116+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-03-30 16:14 Jan Kratochvil
2012-04-04 20:48 ` Tom Tromey
2012-04-04 21:55   ` Mark Kettenis
2012-04-05  3:31     ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-04-05 11:46     ` Phil Muldoon
2012-04-06  0:35       ` Will therefore GDB utilize C++? Not John Gilmore
2012-04-06  1:35         ` Russell Shaw
2012-04-06 13:16           ` Joel Brobecker
2012-04-06 14:43             ` Russell Shaw
2012-04-06 15:34             ` Michael Eager
2012-04-06 23:32             ` John Gilmore
2012-04-07  1:04               ` Robert Dewar
2012-04-07  1:52                 ` Thomas Dineen
2012-04-07 16:54               ` Michael Eager
2012-04-09 23:59               ` Stan Shebs
2012-04-05  0:22   ` Will therefore GDB utilize C++ or not? asmwarrior
2012-04-09 18:41   ` Pedro Alves
2012-04-09 19:05     ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-04-09 19:49       ` Pedro Alves
2012-04-09 20:15         ` Paul Smith
2012-04-12 20:06         ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2012-04-12 21:28           ` Paul_Koning
2012-04-13  0:04           ` Doug Evans
2012-04-18 14:10             ` Pedro Alves
2012-04-18 20:27             ` Tom Tromey
2012-04-18 14:08           ` Pedro Alves
2012-04-21 17:24             ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2012-04-16  6:55         ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-04-18 14:11           ` Pedro Alves
2012-04-18 15:16             ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-04-18 15:28               ` Pedro Alves
2012-04-18 15:54                 ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-04-18 16:01                   ` Pedro Alves
2012-04-18 16:07                   ` Joel Brobecker
2012-04-18 16:13                     ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-04-18 16:23                       ` Joel Brobecker
2012-04-18 16:31                         ` Joel Sherrill
2012-04-18 16:50                           ` Pedro Alves
2012-04-18 16:57                             ` Joel Brobecker
2012-04-18 17:28                               ` Joel Sherrill
2012-04-18 17:40                               ` Paul_Koning
2012-04-18 20:37                                 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2012-04-18 20:38                                   ` Paul_Koning
2012-04-18 20:36                     ` Tom Tromey
2012-04-18 17:48                   ` John Gilmore
2012-04-18 19:07                     ` Tom Tromey
2012-04-18 23:10                       ` John Gilmore
2012-05-18 18:36                         ` Tom Tromey
2012-05-18 18:47                           ` Paul_Koning
2012-05-18 19:36                             ` Tom Tromey
2012-05-18 19:44                               ` Paul_Koning
2012-05-18 20:07                                 ` Tom Tromey
2012-05-18 20:41                                   ` Aurelian Melinte
2012-05-18 18:51                         ` Lazy CU expansion (Was: Will therefore GDB utilize C++ or not?) Tom Tromey
2012-04-18 20:34                   ` Will therefore GDB utilize C++ or not? Tom Tromey
2012-04-18 19:18               ` Will C++ proponents spend 20 minutes to try what they're proposing? John Gilmore
2012-04-18 19:23                 ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-04-18 20:40                 ` Tom Tromey
2012-04-18 20:56                   ` Mike Frysinger
2012-04-18 20:31           ` Will therefore GDB utilize C++ or not? Tom Tromey
2012-04-18 20:25         ` Tom Tromey
2012-05-21 18:11           ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2012-05-21 18:36             ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-11-21 20:18             ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-04-10  0:23     ` Yao Qi
2012-04-10  9:47       ` Yao Qi
2012-04-18 20:11     ` Tom Tromey
2012-04-18 20:31       ` Can it really be ok to map GPL'd code into any old process? John Gilmore
2012-04-18 20:36         ` Pedro Alves
2012-04-23 18:03       ` Will therefore GDB utilize C++ or not? Tom Tromey
2012-05-18 19:55     ` Tom Tromey
2012-05-18 21:56       ` Joel Brobecker
2012-05-19  2:17         ` Tom Tromey
2012-05-19 15:21           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2012-05-19 21:36             ` Joel Brobecker
2012-05-20 12:16         ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2012-05-21 15:56       ` Pedro Alves
2012-05-21 16:15         ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-05-21 17:37           ` Paul_Koning
2012-05-21 17:58             ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-05-22 18:03               ` Paul_Koning
2012-05-21 18:08           ` Pedro Alves
2012-05-21 18:08             ` Tom Tromey
2012-05-21 18:10             ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-05-21 18:54             ` Matt Rice
2012-05-26 15:50         ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-06-02  7:01           ` Russell Shaw
2012-06-02  7:13             ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-06-02 10:47               ` Russell Shaw
2012-06-02 11:10                 ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-06-02 11:15                   ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-06-02 11:15                   ` Russell Shaw
2012-11-22 18:46     ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-11-22 21:42       ` John Gilmore
2012-11-23 15:26         ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-11-27  1:29       ` Stan Shebs
2012-11-27  2:02         ` Paul_Koning
2012-11-27  2:59           ` Stan Shebs
2012-11-27 15:17             ` Paul_Koning
2012-11-27 21:14             ` Tom Tromey
2012-04-09 23:23   ` Stan Shebs
2012-04-18 14:22     ` Pedro Alves
2012-04-18 18:12       ` Stan Shebs
2012-04-18 18:32         ` Paul_Koning
2012-04-18 18:37         ` Pedro Alves
2012-04-19  8:43   ` Yao Qi
2012-12-04 14:17     ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-12-04 14:44       ` Mark Kettenis
2012-12-04 14:52         ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-12-06 20:39           ` Matt Rice
2012-12-07 12:57             ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-12-07 13:25             ` Yao Qi
2012-12-11  6:25               ` Matt Rice
2012-12-13 15:12                 ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-12-14 11:03                   ` Matt Rice
2012-12-14 12:16                     ` Jan Kratochvil

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=4FBA6D04.7060804@redhat.com \
    --to=palves@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
    --cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
    --cc=tromey@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).