can we rename vec<>.safe_push() to vec<>.push()?

Richard Biener richard.guenther@gmail.com
Thu Aug 31 11:42:00 GMT 2017


On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 1:31 PM, Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com> wrote:
> I understand the need for .quick_push(), when we know the size of the
> allocated elements before hand, but do we really need to call the
> common variant safe_push?  Can't we just call it push()?
>
> Or is there some magic C++ rule/idiom that prohibits us from doing this?
>
> I volunteer to provide a patch if y'all agree.

I think having quick_push and safe_push makes you think which one to use
while push would be the obvious lazy one.  Aka nobody thinks of pre-allocating
stuff and using quick_push anymore.

Just my 2 cents...

Richard.

> Aldy



More information about the Gcc mailing list