From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Nmumo-0001S2-OZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:03:14 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=60485 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Nmumo-0001R5-6z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:03:14 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Nmumm-0005OY-5l for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:03:13 -0500 Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:54125) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Nmuml-0005KL-S4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:03:11 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Nmumk-0001HZ-NM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:03:10 -0500 Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 21:59:45 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20100303195945.GA16665@redhat.com> References: <4B7821AC.6080400@mail.berlios.de> <1267565880-18382-19-git-send-email-weil@mail.berlios.de> <20100303114735.GB15278@redhat.com> <4B8EB53D.2010903@mail.berlios.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B8EB53D.2010903@mail.berlios.de> Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCHv3 19/20] eepro100: Remove C++ comments List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stefan Weil Cc: QEMU Developers On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 08:15:09PM +0100, Stefan Weil wrote: > Michael S. Tsirkin schrieb: > > On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 10:37:59PM +0100, Stefan Weil wrote: > >> C++ comments are unwanted, so this is fixed here. > >> > >> * Replace C++ comments by C comments. > >> * Put code which was deactivated by a C++ comment in #if 0...#endif. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Weil > > > > It would be nice to add some documentation to commented > > blocks, explaining why we still keep them around > > and what happens if they are uncommented. > > > Typically, later patches either use this deactivated code (maybe after > some modifications), or they remove it completely. More documentation > would help of course - I'll try my best :-) > > The purpose of this patch was only elimination of C++ comments by formally > transforming them to either C comments or by using the preprocessor #if. Yes, I understand that.