> As you can see by the Reviewboard emails, I reviewed 3 of your 4 patches.
> However before I complete my review on your map patches, I want to inline my
> comments into the diff as you suggested below. I noticed that I could
> download the diff and manually insert my comments, but I'm pretty
> On 2010-06-21 15:53:47, Brad Beckmann wrote:
> > Overall, this patch looks good. I just have a couple questions about it:
1. It appears that the stl_helpers class allows us to overload the operator<<
for Ruby style printing. That is great. Thanks for maintaining this feature
as we move t
nathan binkert
> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 8:50 PM
> To: Nilay Vaish; Ruby Reviewers; Nathan Binkert
> Subject: Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: ruby: get rid of Vector and use
> STL
>
> >> Ignore the ship it tag above. I was testing what happens if I
> check the box pro
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/22/#review46
---
Overall, this patch looks good. I just have a couple questions about it:
1
> On 2010-06-07 20:11:13, Nilay Vaish wrote:
> > 1. Should we use resize() or should we use reserve() for setting the
> > capacity of a vector? Especially during initialization, reserve() might be
> > faster since it does not initialize the allocated memory where as resize()
> > carries out so
>> Ignore the ship it tag above. I was testing what happens if I check the
>> box provided. Is it a vote in favor of the patch?
Yes.
One other thing. Can you make your future comments inline in the
patch if they are about specific things? It's not always obvious
otherwise.
Thanks,
Nate
> On 2010-06-07 20:11:13, Nilay Vaish wrote:
> > 1. Should we use resize() or should we use reserve() for setting the
> > capacity of a vector? Especially during initialization, reserve() might be
> > faster since it does not initialize the allocated memory where as resize()
> > carries out so
> On 2010-06-07 20:11:13, Nilay Vaish wrote:
> > 1. Should we use resize() or should we use reserve() for setting the
> > capacity of a vector? Especially during initialization, reserve() might be
> > faster since it does not initialize the allocated memory where as resize()
> > carries out so
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/22/#review38
---
Ship it!
1. Should we use resize() or should we use reserve() for setting t
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/22/
---
Review request for Ruby Reviewers.
Summary
---
ruby: get rid of Vector and use
10 matches
Mail list logo
