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

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 00/22] Extend remote generator to generate function bodies too



2011/5/6 Eric Blake <eblake redhat com>:
> On 05/06/2011 08:32 AM, Matthias Bolte wrote:
>> To be really sure, we might add a whitelist aside the backlist and
>> once the generator sees something that's not on one of the lists it
>> complains with an error that tells the programmer to either add the
>> function to whitelist and check that the generated code does the right
>> thing, or add it to the blacklist and add a function body manually.
>
> I like that idea the most.
>
>> On the other hand, stuff like flags parameter being unsigned in the
>> public API but signed in the XDR protocol need manual special cases in
>> the generator. We could add some general sanity checks to avoid
>> something like this in the future. The generator could complain when a
>> parameter is called flags but is signed. I'll work on that too.
>
> Also a good idea.
>
> It's not an API change if we switch existing offenders to unsigned, is
> it?  Even for C++, where there is function overloading, we are using
> 'extern "C"' declarations.
>
>>
>> So, are you just inclined to ACK or do you ACK this? :)
>>
>
> I'm with danpb here - Treat this as an ACK, and push now, to maximize
> the testing exposure.  Do your proposed cleanups (documentation, sanity
> checking, whitelisting) as followups.

Okay, I finally manged to push the series. I had to resolve some
syntax-check and push hook hassle first.

Matthias


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