Re: [PATCH 1/5] rc-code: merge and rename ir-core

["David Härdeman" <david@hardeman.nu>]

On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 11:10:40AM -0400, Andy Walls wrote:
> Tag files and a decent editor are all one needs for full code 
> navigation.  The kernel makefile already has a tags target to make the 
> tags file.  

If you like to use tags, it won't be affected by many or few files so 
it's not an argument for either approach. 

> Smaller files make for better logical isolation of functions,limiting 
> visibilty/scope, 

Limiting visibility so that you'll have to add explicit declarations to 
ir-core-priv.h for inter-file function calls and functions that would 
otherwise be unnecessary (ir_raw_get_allowed_protocols() for example) 
doesn't sound like an advantage to me.

> and faster compilation of a file (but maybe at the expense of link 
> time).  

*sigh* compile times on my laptop:

rc-core.o		0.558s

ir-functions.o		0.321s
ir-sysfs.o		0.251s
ir-raw-event.o		0.397s
rc-map.o		0.265s

> That sort of isolation of functionality into smaller files also makes 
> the code more digestable for someone new looking at it, IMO. 

First of all, I personally find it much easier to grok a new subsystem 
if the relevant parts are gathered into one file, both when I'm new to a 
subsystem and when I'm used to it. drivers/input/input.c and 
drivers/input/evdev.c come to mind as good examples.

But more importantly, how about focusing on the people actually writing 
patches for ir-core rather than hypotetical people?

-- 
David Härdeman