From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KYM8d-0008Io-21 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:36:47 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KYM8b-0008HV-G9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:36:46 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45943 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KYM8b-0008HN-9y for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:36:45 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:49770) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KYM8a-0005wD-SU for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:36:45 -0400 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7REa7qv007342 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:36:28 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m7REZu8l020783 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:35:56 -0400 Received: from zweiblum.travel.kraxel.org (vpn-4-120.str.redhat.com [10.32.4.120]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7REZosO028406 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:35:50 -0400 Message-ID: <48B56645.60206@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 16:35:49 +0200 From: Gerd Hoffmann MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch] add byteordered types References: <48B53E23.5040107@redhat.com> <200808271456.57273.paul@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <200808271456.57273.paul@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Paul Brook wrote: > On Wednesday 27 August 2008, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: >> +static inline le16 write_le16(uint16_t cpu) \ > > This is IMHO a bad name for this function. It doesn't write anything. I'm not that happy the name too and certainly open for better suggestions I could use instead of read/write. The alternatives I can think of are not very nice either: (1) get/set -- same problem as read/write. (2) make_foo() instead of write_foo() -- "make" is too generic IMHO. (3) create_foo() instead of write_foo() -- no nice symmetric replacement for read_foo(). better ideas anyone? cheers, Gerd