> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii writes:
Eli> I understand all that, but why would the eq_f function need to be an
Eli> external function on its own?
It is just to avoid other users having to write their own.
Eli> E.g., if we were to write a qsort replacement, would we have a
Eli> suitable string c
> Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 14:26:15 -0700
> From: Doug Evans
> Cc: d...@redhat.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patc...@sourceware.org
>
> > Sorry if I'm missing something, but why do we need to advertise such a
> > function at all? Given that libiberty already provides filename_cmp,
> > isn't it
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 12:36:44 -0700
>> From: Doug Evans
>> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patc...@sourceware.org
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 12:21 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>> >
>> > I think it's confusing to have filename_cmp and filen
> Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 12:36:44 -0700
> From: Doug Evans
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patc...@sourceware.org
>
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 12:21 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
> >
> > I think it's confusing to have filename_cmp and filename_eq that do
> > basically the same thing. Perhaps filename
If there's precedent, I'm not worried about it.
Ok to check in.
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 12:21 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> I think it's confusing to have filename_cmp and filename_eq that do
> basically the same thing. Perhaps filename_eq should be
> filename_cmp_v or filename_cmp_hash or something, to indicate that
> it's *supposed* to be the same functionality
I think it's confusing to have filename_cmp and filename_eq that do
basically the same thing. Perhaps filename_eq should be
filename_cmp_v or filename_cmp_hash or something, to indicate that
it's *supposed* to be the same functionality as filename_cmp but with
a different signature?
Hi. "ping" [for the libiberty part]
[The gdb part needs to be updated due to recent changes there, but I'm
going to wait until the libiberty part is approved.]
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Doug Evans wrote:
> Hi.
>
> filename_seen in gdb does a linear search, this patch changes it
> to use
[- gdb, + gdb-patches]
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 8:10 PM, Doug Evans wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> filename_seen in gdb does a linear search, this patch changes it
>> to use a hash table.
>>
>> Ok to check in?
>
> Why not just use htab_hash_string? Th
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 8:10 PM, Doug Evans wrote:
> Hi.
>
> filename_seen in gdb does a linear search, this patch changes it
> to use a hash table.
>
> Ok to check in?
Why not just use htab_hash_string? The file name canonicalization can
be put in gdb itself.
Ciao!
Steven
Hi.
filename_seen in gdb does a linear search, this patch changes it
to use a hash table.
Ok to check in?
I couldn't think of a good reason to put filename_hash,filename_eq in gdb,
and I like placing them close to where hashtab.c and filename_cmp are defined.
I also couldn't think of a sufficien
11 matches
Mail list logo
