This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC 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: [libcpp] maybe canonicalize system paths in line-map


On 26 April 2012 20:56, Dodji Seketeli <dodji@seketeli.org> wrote:
> Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopezibanez@gmail.com> a écrit:
>
>> On 26 April 2012 20:11, Dodji Seketeli <dodji@seketeli.org> wrote:
>>> Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopezibanez@gmail.com> a écrit:
>>>
>>>> Why not remove this comment and free file here with XDELETEVEC (file) ?
>>>>
>>>>> + ?canonical_path = maybe_shorter_path (path);
>>>>> + ?if (canonical_path != NULL && canonical_path != path)
>>>>> + ? ?{
>>>>> + ? ? ?/* The canonical path was newly allocated. ?Let's free the
>>>>> + ? ? ? ?non-canonical one. ?*/
>>>>> + ? ? ?free (path);
>>>>> + ? ? ?path = canonical_path;
>>>>> + ? ?}
>>>>> +
>>>>
>>>> This way you avoid doing all this extra work here.
>>>
>>> If I follow my personal style, I'd prefer not having a function delete
>>> what it receives in argument, unless the name of that function makes it
>>> really obvious. ?Furthermore, that function could be later re-used on a
>>> string that is not necessarily meant to be deleted.
>>
>> Fair enough. Still the comment at the top of the function needs to be changed:
>>
>> +/* Canonicalize the path to FILE. Return the canonical form if it is
>> + ? shorter, otherwise return the original. ?This function may free the
>> + ? memory pointed by FILE. ?*/
>>
>> and then the function could return NULL when it fails to find a shorter path:
>>
>> + ?else
>> + ? ?{
>> + ? ? ?XDELETEVEC (file2);
>> + ? ? ?return file;
>> + ? ?}
>> +}
>>
>> here. This way you can still simplify the caller by just checking if
>> (canonical_path)
>
> OK by me. ?Thank you for caring about this.
>
> Would you mind just taking it over again and submit a proper patch +
> ChangeLog? ?I just chimed in to help; I didn't mean to step on your
> toes. ?:-)

Oh, no apologies needed. Thanks you chimed in! I wish more people were
working on this stuff! Anyway, let''s wait to see what the decision
makers say.

Cheers,

Manuel.


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