Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Separate function types from opaque types in include/qemu/typedefs.h

["Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>]

* Peter Maydell (peter.maydell@linaro.org) wrote:
> On 22 June 2017 at 19:08, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 22.06.2017 19:50, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> >> Could do; I'm just not finding tiny header files with one or
> >> two entries each that useful.
> 
> Well, it means that the bulk of code that doesn't care about the
> types doesn't get its compilation fractionally slowed by having
> to parse the typedef anyway. In general I think we're drifting
> towards "have each .c file get fewer things automatically" rather
> than otherwise (eg more finely focused files rather than stuffing
> everything into qemu-common.h).

At the cost of things getting fractionally slower by including lots
more tiny headers.

I generally agree in the case where there's a useful chunk,
but when it's down to one or two definitions I don't see the point.

> > Do we really need these function typedefs at all? IMHO it's quite ugly
> > to hide such things in a typedef unless it is really necessary (and in
> > this case, it does not seem to be really necessary since it is only used
> > in a few places). So what about simply removing the typedefs in this case?
> 
> I find function typedefs much more readable than having the
> function-types inline in function arguments and the like.
> 
> This is all fairly rapidly heading into bikeshed territory
> though -- in the final analysis I don't think it matters
> much what we do.

Agreed.

Dave

> thanks
> -- PMM
--
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK