From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:43022) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T4CM4-0002b0-1y for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 10:56:27 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T4CLu-00021P-MX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 10:56:23 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:7367) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T4CLu-00021A-EQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 10:56:14 -0400 Message-ID: <5034F306.7050602@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 08:56:06 -0600 From: Eric Blake MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1345639535-8822-1-git-send-email-benoit@irqsave.net> <1345639535-8822-2-git-send-email-benoit@irqsave.net> <5034E6A2.7060900@redhat.com> <20120822143221.GC26403@irqsave.net> In-Reply-To: <20120822143221.GC26403@irqsave.net> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigDFBEB18EFDB6E627D8B4369D" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V4 1/2] qapi: Add SnapshotInfo and ImageInfo. List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Beno=EEt_Canet?= Cc: aliguori@us.ibm.com, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Beno=EEt_Canet?= , stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, xiawenc@linux.vnet.ibm.com This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigDFBEB18EFDB6E627D8B4369D Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 08/22/2012 08:32 AM, Beno=EEt Canet wrote: >> Since we have two fields named *-nsec, it might be worth clarifying th= at >> date-nsec is merely the fractional portion to be combined with date-se= c >> (always less than 1000000000), while vm-clock-nsec includes seconds if= >> the drift is that large. >> >> For that matter, should we even be exposing things in this manner? I >> know the internal struct has seconds and nanos separate for date, >> because it maps to struct timespec; but why can't we combine them into= >> one giant number for JSON? >=20 > Wouldn't people working with low level language be annoyed after parsin= g > this JSON to have to split this combined number in two parts to fit > them back into struct timespec ? Perhaps, in which case, why don't we present vm-clock-nsec via two fields of seconds and fraction, for the same reasoning? My point is that we have two different bike shed colors showing in this one API, but I would prefer we be consistent and pick just one (as to _which_ color, I can be persuaded either way). --=20 Eric Blake eblake@redhat.com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org --------------enigDFBEB18EFDB6E627D8B4369D Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Public key at http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJQNPMGAAoJEKeha0olJ0Nq4u8H/20QeH5YKWkV9bqTR2PkHP5G Q7TtMSgSVnZenmbGYPHrWQVdULM2+UERd1YLFp9f6tsCu1mkwA/KXNzYDAPe1ne4 fQ+0G+clOb40GaZubmsU8HXSZhQ4LPUAZQF6S31V/iiv5TcNSm22LDzhuWAWpKA1 8UZF3iuXOdUt/ICtNbZJCKH7L4LxRTkpqTow9iMScZG+gKCYvI0dyJk6e9HPm49B QLxdlRFlrj6MzUG1OsJfSoqX1jmnqsT0/Xp6ys2joeYFGenh4c3EQndzj9U0lFPq Olulh5AG3iCxzqWc8jAHsU/rOtMRopay7iC3JS7uFIW/BKTp1qXbgNwu+yt3Ypw= =gWkY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigDFBEB18EFDB6E627D8B4369D--