This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH, gdb/exp] Handle DW_OP_GNU_variable_value refs to abstract dies
- From: Tom Tromey <tom at tromey dot com>
- To: Kevin Buettner <kevinb at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, Tom de Vries <tdevries at suse dot de>
- Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2018 21:45:44 -0600
- Subject: Re: [PATCH, gdb/exp] Handle DW_OP_GNU_variable_value refs to abstract dies
- References: <20180802210405.5c04ca7a@pinnacle.lan> <20180802211754.40a529c2@pinnacle.lan> <87o9ej1emk.fsf@tromey.com> <20180818133158.7e5b4dcb@pinnacle.lan> <93529546-71b0-4268-880a-79b00062ecd2@suse.de> <20180823141240.577345e0@pinnacle.lan> <982919b5-93ba-3840-5839-6accc904b459@suse.de> <5e6ac298-bf8f-6957-984a-67bb58b62be9@suse.de> <95697ec8-30e2-acaf-60fd-e46524f88e72@suse.de> <20180904145449.2cf6a099@pinnacle.lan>
>>>>> "Kevin" == Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com> writes:
Kevin> Is there a good reason to use VEC instead of std::vector? I know that
Kevin> there have been a number of patches which have been replacing VEC
Kevin> with std:vector. So, unless there's a compelling reason to use VEC,
Kevin> we might as well use std:vector here and save someone else the effort
Kevin> of changing this use of VEC later on.
Thanks for this note. One of my gdb c++-ification/cleanup goals is to
get rid of VEC.
Tom