Re: [PATCH v5 10/14] perf tools: Enable indices setting syntax for BPF maps

[Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>]

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:02:28AM +0800, Wangnan (F) wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2015/12/15 21:42, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> >On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:39:19AM +0000, Wang Nan wrote:
> >>This patch introduce a new syntax to perf event parser:
> >>
> >>  # perf record -e './test_bpf_map_3.c/maps:channel.value[0,1,2,3...5]=101/' usleep 2
> >why 3 dots? I'd think the standard is 2 ?
> 
> The standard (actually it is a gcc extension, not C standard) is 3 dots.
> Please have a look at [1] and [2]. Although I also think '..' is better.
> 
> So after you seeing this, do you still think we should follow our
> intuition instead of following GCC? If you still prefer '..' I'll
> change it.

I'm ok with '...'

I think I only thought about '..' as a standard because of the way I use git log ;-)

thanks,
jirka

> 
> Thank you.
> 
> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/11/23/4
> [2] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Case-Ranges.html
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> >just curious
> >   [0,1,2,3..5]
> >3 made me think there's something speecial about it ;-)
> >
> >
> >jirka
> 
>