From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
To: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Michael Roth <michael.roth@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] qapi/expr: Split check_expr out from check_exprs
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 13:14:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zg9lra3n.fsf@pond.sub.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230209184758.1017863-4-jsnow@redhat.com> (John Snow's message of "Thu, 9 Feb 2023 13:47:54 -0500")
John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> writes:
> Primarily, this reduces a nesting level of a particularly long
> block. It's mostly code movement, but a new docstring is created.
>
> It also has the effect of creating a fairly convenient "catch point" in
> check_exprs for exception handling without making the nesting level even
> worse.
I don't get this sentence, I'm afraid. It could tip the balance...
> Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
>
> ---
>
> This patch was originally written as part of my effort to factor out
> QAPISourceInfo from this file by having expr.py raise a simple
> exception, then catch and wrap it at the higher level.
>
> This series doesn't do that anymore, but reducing the nesting level
> still seemed subjectively nice. It's not crucial.
Is reducing the nesting level worth sacrificing git-blame?
If we decide it is: there are two "Checked in check_exprs" comments in
need of an update.
> Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
Harmless accident :)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-10 12:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-09 18:47 [PATCH v3 0/7] qapi: static typing conversion, pt5c John Snow
2023-02-09 18:47 ` [PATCH v3 1/7] qapi: Update flake8 config John Snow
2023-02-09 18:47 ` [PATCH v3 2/7] qapi: update pylint configuration John Snow
2023-02-09 18:47 ` [PATCH v3 3/7] qapi/expr: Split check_expr out from check_exprs John Snow
2023-02-10 12:14 ` Markus Armbruster [this message]
2023-02-10 12:33 ` Markus Armbruster
2023-02-10 15:20 ` John Snow
2023-02-11 10:06 ` Markus Armbruster
2023-02-14 17:04 ` John Snow
2023-02-09 18:47 ` [PATCH v3 4/7] qapi/expr: add typing workaround for AbstractSet John Snow
2023-02-10 15:44 ` Markus Armbruster
2023-02-10 16:26 ` John Snow
2023-02-14 17:08 ` John Snow
2023-02-09 18:47 ` [PATCH v3 5/7] qapi/parser: add QAPIExpression type John Snow
2023-02-11 6:49 ` Markus Armbruster
2023-02-14 16:57 ` John Snow
2023-02-09 18:47 ` [PATCH v3 6/7] qapi: remove _JSONObject John Snow
2023-02-11 6:18 ` Markus Armbruster
2023-02-09 18:47 ` [PATCH v3 7/7] qapi: remove JSON value FIXME John Snow
2023-02-11 6:42 ` Markus Armbruster
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87zg9lra3n.fsf@pond.sub.org \
--to=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=jsnow@redhat.com \
--cc=michael.roth@amd.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.