Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote:
>On 11/14/13 04:04, tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote:
>> From: Trevor Saunders <tsaund...@mozilla.com>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> this patch adds and starts to use a class auto_bitmap, which is a
>very thin
>> wrapper around bitmap. Its advantage is that it takes care of
>delocation
>> automatically. So you can do things like
>>
>> int
>> f ()
>> {
>> auto_bitmap x;
>> // do stuff with x
>> }
>>
>> Another advantage of this class is it puts the bitmap_head struct on
>the stack
>> instead of mallocing it or using a obstack.
>>
>> I Think the biggest question is if I should make auto_bitmap a full
>c++ified
>> wrapper around bitmap or if I should contiune just taking the
>address of it
>> and passing it as a bitmap, but other comments are of course welcome
>too.
>I'd prefer to see it fully c++ified.
>
>In response to one of Richi's comments, I spot checked the patch and
>only found two occurrences where this lengthened the lifetime of the
>bitmap in any significant way. The vast majority of the time any
>increase in length was trivial.
>
>Those instances are in tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c and the other in
>tree-ssa-strlen.c. I don't think you need to change anything for them,
>
>I'm just pointed out that of all the stuff you changed, these were the
>only ones I saw where lifetimes were changed significantly.
I still ask why we need a new type and cannot put this functionality into
bitmap_head itself.
Richard.
>jeff
