On 11/20/12, Xinliang David Li <davi...@google.com> wrote: > one minus -- less gdb friendly.
Do you mean that gdb does not handle the stream expressions or something else? > > David > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Lawrence Crowl <cr...@googlers.com> wrote: >> On 11/20/12, Diego Novillo <dnovi...@google.com> wrote: >>> On Nov 20, 2012 Basile Starynkevitch <bas...@starynkevitch.net> wrote: >>> > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:24:40AM -0800, Lawrence Crowl wrote: >>> > > function (FILE *, item_to_dump, formatting) >>> > > function (item_to_dump, formatting) >>> > >>> > Since we have switched to C++, it would be really nice to have >>> > dump functions writing to a C++ std::ostream >>> >>> I'm not sure what to think about using streams. I have no great >>> familiarity with them, so I can't say whether they provide any >>> concrete advantages over dumping to FILE objects. Additionally, >>> the rest of the compiler uses FILE objects for I/O. How do the >>> two stay in sync? >> >> There are two big advantages. First, you can concisely output a >> bunch of stuff without having to worry about types. Very good for >> quick coding. >> >> std::cout << "My variable is " << varnode >> << " and its type is " << typnode >> << std::endl; >> >> Second, the streams write to an output stream, which can be a >> file or it can be a string buffer. So, output isn't essentially >> different from writing chars to a string. >> >> The primary disadvantage is that to exploit that those advantages, >> you need to convert all of the debugging/dumping I/O to use streams. >> >> And, as a side note, highly formatted output generally is not >> much better than printf. For any text that needs to be localized, >> I recommend that we stick with what we have. >> >> -- >> Lawrence Crowl > -- Lawrence Crowl
