On 05/28/2015 06:49 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
.
This mechanism has been just adapted. I find it quite useful as we have
examples in source code where we
allocate same struct/class types from a various pool. For debugging
purpose, it helps to identify if
release operation is called for a correct pool.
I saw that you were following existing practice for the pools in the
removal patch. I still don't like it as it makes mixing and matching
objects harder when debugging gcc and if the structure is exposed for
plugins, then we've got an unnecessary ABI plugin breakage.
I certainly understand how it's useful -- I'm not questioning that. I'm
questioning changing the size of structures on ENABLE_CHECKING.
My first inclination would be to include all that stuff unconditionally.
If that's too much overhead, then perhaps include the structure
member, but not bother with any of the bookkeeping except for
ENABLE_CHECKING.
Anyway, I would like to commit all these patches at once (one by one).
Thus, I'm going to wait for approval for the whole series before I'll
commit the set.
Quite reasonable -- I was mostly trying to make sure I understood the
testing situation.
I think at this point the whole series is approved, so you can move forward.
jeff
