From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21418 invoked by alias); 27 Nov 2012 15:17:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 21403 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Nov 2012 15:17:00 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ausxippc101.us.dell.com (HELO ausxippc101.us.dell.com) (143.166.85.207) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 15:16:55 +0000 X-Loopcount0: from 10.170.28.41 From: To: CC: Subject: Re: Will therefore GDB utilize C++ or not? Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 15:17:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <20120330161403.GA17891@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87aa2rjkb8.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <4F832D5B.9030308@redhat.com> <20121122184637.GA29474@host2.jankratochvil.net> <50B41784.2080606@earthlink.net> <50B42C86.4060900@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <50B42C86.4060900@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <650872243D079442B9CC2835F81C406C@dell.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-11/txt/msg00075.txt.bz2 On Nov 26, 2012, at 9:59 PM, Stan Shebs wrote: > ... > The flipside is that you're potentially making everybody else work harder= for your sake. If you're the only one with a space-constrained target usi= ng stock gdbserver, then it might make more sense to look into tweaking a C= ++ gdbserver to stay under the size you require. For instance, when we dis= cussed this before, 300K was OK for space, so presumably 600K is not good -= perhaps just conditionalize the tracepoint bits to compensate for the spac= e lost to C++ runtime? That's a fair point. If C++ makes gdbserver more maintainable or easier to= improve, and those benefits outweigh the cost of dealing with space pressu= re for people who have it, that's a valid way to decide. Given how C++ is = "designed" it's not necessarily obvious that switching to it is a good thin= g, never mind that it brings benefits that outweigh the size costs, but I'l= l concede the possibility. What concerned me was what seemed to be an assertion that space pressure do= esn't exist. It does and it's real, but it is indeed one factor in a set o= f factors that need to be traded off. >=20 > It's always seemed a little sloppy to me that we advertise gdbserver as s= uitable for targets, but don't actually track its size, consider each patch= 's effect, etc. For instance, a one-liner that brings in a bunch of librar= y code might be more problematic for footprint than a page of new code. That's a very good point. paul