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: [RFA] Change target_write_memory_blocks to use std::vector


On 2018-02-26 14:37, Tom Tromey wrote:
"Simon" == Simon Marchi <simark@simark.ca> writes:

+  load_section_data ()
+  {
+  }

Simon> Is this empty constructor needed?

I only added it for clarity.  Is there some standard approach to this?
Or a gdb standard?

Of all the C++ patches you did, I can't remember one where you added an empty constructor :). I think the de-facto standard in C++ is to let the compiler generate a default constructor instead. If we wanted to be explicit, we should rather do

  load_section_data () = default;

but I think it's just fine to not declare anything.

Simon> Actually, I think it would be nice to give constructors to the data
Simon> structures when possible, to make it less likely to have them in
Simon> invalid states.

Simon> Here's an example, you can integrate it in your patch if you like it.

Yeah, this seems better to me.
I will pull it in.

Ok, well at least it invalidates the point above :)

Simon


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