This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch][python] 1 of 5 - Frame filter Python C code changes.
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "gdb-patches\ at sourceware dot org" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:58:43 -0600
- Subject: Re: [patch][python] 1 of 5 - Frame filter Python C code changes.
- References: <513E56EC dot 2050802 at redhat dot com> <87vc8kzd5d dot fsf at fleche dot redhat dot com> <5151B6DE dot 80703 at redhat dot com>
>>>>> "Phil" == Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon@redhat.com> writes:
Phil> I think a frame stash using a hash table is doable, but I think it is
Phil> overkill because I am extremely suspicious of the frame to frame
Phil> object code.
I assume you are going to fix the frame to frame object code instead?
And this will fix the 20% penalty?
I'm not totally sure it should be "instead" rather than "as well as",
since it seems like some gdb.Frame access patterns will have bad
behavior with the current stash.
Tom