From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NUerJ-0003bZ-Os
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 06:24:25 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NUerF-0003Xr-Oc
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 06:24:25 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=51445 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NUerF-0003XX-Et
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 06:24:21 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:18259)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1NUerF-0000uW-0Y
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 06:24:21 -0500
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 09:24:08 -0200
From: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 11/11] Change the monitor to use the new
	do_info_qtree.
Message-ID: <20100112092408.0745d345@doriath>
In-Reply-To: <m3hbqr7mse.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
References: <1261862362-2530-1-git-send-email-nathan@parenthephobia.org.uk>
	<1261862362-2530-12-git-send-email-nathan@parenthephobia.org.uk>
	<20091229151508.35c4bc55@doriath> <1262114724.4088.17.camel@athens>
	<20091229191317.6385ae2d@doriath>
	<m3hbqr7mse.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: Nathan Baum <nathan@parenthephobia.org.uk>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 09:25:05 +0100
Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:

> >                        We were considering something along these lines
> > but we didn't consider having the description as part of the dict,
> > for example.
> 
> We did, actually :)

 That's good then!

> >  This solves some issues we were trying to address.
> >
> >  The only problem I can see is that the documentation and code will
> > be in different places, which makes it easier to get outdated.
> 
> Not necessarily.  Documentation will be in whatever place we put it.
> Some places require tools to extract it.

 I was thinking in having them on separate file just to make the
work as easy as possible, having a tool to extract them from the
function's documentation is perfect, but I'm afraid you'll have
to come up with your own tags to distinguish among responses,
events, commands etc.