This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [patch 1/2] Make values more lazy if possible

From: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>
To: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, Andrew Burgess <aburgess at broadcom dot com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 17:11:58 +0100
Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] Make values more lazy if possible
References: <20110106120312.GB32416@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <m3d3o9rebt.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>

On Thu, 06 Jan 2011 21:01:58 +0100, Tom Tromey wrote:
> I looked through this and I think it seems reasonable.

Great, when it already got review I have checked it in:
	http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-cvs/2011-01/msg00086.html

> It makes me wonder why we need allocate_value at all, though
> I assume I'm forgetting something :)

I have seen there more missing generalization of the lazy/non-lazy values,
such as to ensure `value->lazy && value->contents != NULL' can never happen,
as such case makes no sense and it was commonly present so far.

But this patch was already a sidetrack so I did not go further that way.

Thanks,
Jan

References:
- [patch 1/2] Make values more lazy if possible
  - From: Jan Kratochvil
- Re: [patch 1/2] Make values more lazy if possible
  - From: Tom Tromey

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]