Re: Using C++ in GCC is OK

[Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>]

Laurynas Biveinis <laurynas.biveinis@gmail.com> writes:

> 2010/6/2 Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com>:
>> As you say, gengtype includes specific support for VEC. ÂUsing
>> std::vector instead will require some work in gengtype, but not too
>> much. ÂCurrently gengtype generates code like this for a VEC:
>>
>> Â Â Â Âsize_t l0 = (size_t)(((*x).base).num);
>> Â Â Â Âfor (i0 = 0; i0 != l0; i0++) {
>> Â Â Â Â Âif ((*x).base.vec[i0].jump_functions != NULL) {
>>
>> It should be entirely feasible to make it generate std::vector
>> accessor functions instead.
>
> Ian, do you have an idea on how to avoid _M_impl dependency in
> gengtype or what else to do about it?
>
> Because we can trivially make gengtype mark the vector itself and mark
> whatever was put into vector, but not _M_impl.

I don't think I understand the question.  _M_impl is a field of the
vector itself.  It's not allocated separately.

Ian