Re: [RFA 17/22] Remove make_cleanup_restore_current_uiout

[Simon Marchi <simon dot marchi at polymtl dot ca>]

On 2016-09-29 10:05, Tom Tromey wrote:
> > > > > > "Trevor" == Trevor Saunders <tbsaunde@tbsaunde.org> writes:
>
> Trevor> isn't this just scoped_restore<ui_out *> ? why do you need a 
> separate
> Trevor> class?
>
> In an earlier thread there was a discussion of not having this cleanup
> be over-general -- that is, it was intentionally specific to just
> current_uiout.

In that case, may I suggest naming the class 
scoped_restore_current_uiout?

IIRC, the original comment was that it was not necessary to have a 
parametrized make_cleanup_restore_uiout, when the only uiout we restore 
is the current_ui.  And I don't think there was a cleanup to restore a 
generic pointer, so we had to have a specialized cleanup anyway.

Here we have the option to have one less class by using your 
scoped_restore:

    scoped_restore<ui_out *> uiout_restore (&current_uiout, 
other_uiout);

vs having a specific one:

    scoped_restore_current_uiout uiout_restore;
    current_uiout = other_uiout;

I am ok with both methods, it's not a big deal.

Simon