Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] gpu: nova-core: add ChannelIdPool

[John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>]

On 8/13/26 2:44 PM, Yury Norov wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 02:38:34PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
>> On 8/13/26 1:58 PM, Gary Guo wrote:
>>> On Thu Aug 13, 2026 at 9:48 PM BST, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
>>>> On Thu Aug 13, 2026 at 8:32 PM CEST, Yury Norov wrote:
>> ...
>>>> The code from Eliot does actually already takes advantage of this. In
>>>>
>>>> 	pool.alloc_area(nz::<8>(), Alignment::new::<8>())?;
>>>
>>> I have to say this looks quite ugly, compared to just `.alloc_area(8, 8)`. In
>>> this case I'd go with something aesthetically better...
>>
>> In addition to aesthetics, a practical concern is that there is a
>> higher cognitive load to both reading and writing the longer form,
>> above. Perhaps that is just the price one must pay.
>>
>> However, for primitive types, I am hearing (even from Miguel) that
>> there might be a way to get the static checking *and* an easier
>> interface.
>>
>> Here's hoping you all can find a way to do that. :)

On second thought, we haven't talked about what the callers look
like here, and .alloc_area(8, 8) could simply force the mess back
into the call sites.

> 
> There's a nice postfix macro proposal:
> 
> computation().macro!().method().another_macro!()
> 
> https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2442
> 
> That would solve the problem. But it doesn't move since 2024. I
> recall it was mentioned in the bitfields discussion, but maybe
> it's a false memory...

thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard