On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Karthik Nayak <karthik....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com>
> wrote:
>>> +struct align {
>>> + align_type position;
>>> + unsigned int width;
>>> };
>>>
>>> #define REF_FORMATTING_STATE_INIT { 0, NULL }
>>> @@ -69,6 +79,8 @@ struct ref_formatting_state {
>>>
>>> struct atom_value {
>>> const char *s;
>>> + struct align *align;
>>
>> Why does 'align' need to be heap-allocated rather than just being a
>> direct member of 'atom_value'? Does 'align' need to exist beyond the
>> lifetime of its 'atom_value'? If not, making it a direct member might
>> simplify resource management (no need to free it).
>
> But it does, since we carry over the contents of align from atom_value to
> cb_data of ref_formatting_stack and that holds the value until we read
> the %(end)
> atom hence it seemed like a better choice to allocate it on the heap
So, you're saying that the 'atom_value' instance no longer exists at
the point that processing of %(end) needs to access the alignment
properties? If so, then heap allocation make sense. Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
