From: David Carlton <carlton@math.stanford.edu>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb <gdb@sources.redhat.com>, Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>,
Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [rfc] struct dictionary
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 04:35:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ro1znmf8a9g.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3EA89AB3.6050403@redhat.com>
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 22:17:23 -0400, Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com> said:
>> Blocks currently store symbols in one of three different ways:
>> using a hash table, using an unsorted list, or using a sorted list.
>> Most blocks are built by buildsym.c, which use only the former two
>> mechanisms. Sorted list blocks are only being produced by
>> mdebugread.c. And, to make matters worse, jv-lang.c produces one
>> unsorted list block for which the predicate BLOCK_SHOULD_SORT
>> matches; the chain of events by which GDB actually treats that
>> block correctly is very tenuous.
> Um, didn't BLOCK_SHOULD_SORT get deleted?
No. I tried in last fall, but Jim didn't like it because it probably
would have made performance for mdebugread be awful. Daniel recently
proposed hashing sorted blocks on the fly, but he withdrew that patch
quickly when he found a way to work around whatever problem caused him
to be particularly annoyed with sorted blocks.
Basically, either somebody needs to buildsym-ify mdebugread.c or else
symbol lookup has to be made a bit more abstract. These would
actually both be good ideas for reasons other than getting rid of
BLOCK_SHOULD_SORT, so it's certainly not an either-or choice.
David Carlton
carlton@math.stanford.edu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-04-25 4:35 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 [this message]
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
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=ro1znmf8a9g.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU \
--to=carlton@math.stanford.edu \
--cc=ac131313@redhat.com \
--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).