On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 7:22 PM Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On September 21, 2019 11:12:38 AM GMT+02:00, Christian Biesinger via > gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > >Hello, > > > >I would like to move hash-table.h, hash-map.h and related files > >to libiberty, so that GDB can make use of it. > > > >I see that gcc already has a C++ file in include/ (unique-ptr.h), > >which I understand is libiberty. > > > >However, this patch is not complete yet (for a start, it doesn't > >compile). Before I go further down this road, is this acceptable > >in principle to the gcc/libiberty maintainers? > > > >(the bulk of the patch is including vec.h in a lot of files, > >because hash-table.h previously included it. It doesn't > >actually use it, and I didn't think it was necessary to > >move that to libiberty as well, so I removed that include > >and instead am adding it to all the files that now don't > >compile.) > > The bulk seems to be hash_table to hash_table_ggc renaming. Can you explain?
Yeah, sure. If hash-table.h lives in libiberty, I wanted to reduce the dependencies on other headers. GCC's garbage collector seems like something that does not belong there, so I moved this create function to a separate header, which required renaming it since it now can't be part of the same class. (the other option would be some kind of #ifdef GCC thing, but that seemed ugly to me) > Also we can then rename create_ggc back to create? Sure, that'd work. Christian
