[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]

"delete" and the Smalltalk translator

Date: Wed, 20 Jun 90 21:20:42 PDT
   From: xanadu!michael (Michael McClary)


   Let's make it a LITTLE different:

	   (expr) destroy  =>  DESTROY (expr)

   and include the macro:

	   #define	DESTROY(expr)			\
		   {				\
			   Heaper * tmp = (expr);	\
			   delete tmp;		\

   in tofux.hxx.  ...

I started coding this, and noticed that the above macro is a classic
example of one that can and should be replaced by an inline.  I've
just checked, and the following inline when used generates essentially
the same cfront output as a direct delete.  

	inline void destroy (Heaper * tmp)
	    delete tmp;

It is interesting that cfront has such problems with:

	SPTR(X) p;

	delete p;

But no problems generating fine code for:

	destroy (p);

   (Hmmm...  If we didn't capitalize "destroy", does the translator still
    need a special case?)

Well, if we make it an inline member function of Heaper, then no
special case is needed at all!  "(expr) destroy" simply becomes
"(expr)->destroy()".  I'll try this.  I think it's curious how little
our intuitions have even now been acclimated to the power of inlining. 

   [Also by the way:  I strongly prefer "func(...)" to "func (...)".]

My convention is to use "func (...)", and "MACRO(...)".  To each his