-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 683
Eliminate code duplication in memory statistics printing #841
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Closed
akosthekiss
wants to merge
1
commit into
jerryscript-project:master
from
akosthekiss:mem_stats_print
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@akiss77, for me it seems better to put
mem_stats_print
under#ifdef MEM_STATS
, as without the define the call is no-op.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@ruben-ayrapetyan I've been considering that as well. The reason why I proposed the above is that it remained semantically equivalent with the original version, which also left the call to
mem_heap_print
unguarded. Even inmem_heap_print
, there are quite some code lines which are always compiled, and only a final portion is ifdef'd byMEM_STATS
. If we choose to ifdef the call here, then maybe we should consider putting much more code under ifdef guards,There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@akiss77, I see. Thank you for your explanation.
The part of
mem_heap_print
that is not currently guarded byMEM_STATS
, is not executed during the call, because the corresponding arguments are set tofalse
, and onlydump_stats
argument is set totrue
.So, maybe, its better to extract part of
mem_heap_print
that outputs statistics to another routine likemem_heap_print_stats
, guard it withMEM_STATS
, and call it frommem_heap_print
andmem_stats_print
. In the case,mem_stats_print
could be guarded by#ifdef
around the function, not inside.What do you think about this?