From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:55406) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TGovu-0007yP-P8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 06:33:38 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TGovo-0004R9-7f for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 06:33:34 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f45.google.com ([209.85.220.45]:58833) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TGovn-0004R4-VB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 06:33:28 -0400 Received: by padfb10 with SMTP id fb10so342959pad.4 for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 03:33:26 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <5062D9ED.4020606@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 12:33:17 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1348236465-23124-1-git-send-email-mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <505C8E76.1030104@redhat.com> <20120921162428.GS16157@illuin> <20120924181442.GV16157@illuin> <5061511C.4040504@redhat.com> <20120925154502.GW16157@illuin> <87ehlpolhj.fsf@codemonkey.ws> <5062D6E1.2050207@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <5062D6E1.2050207@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] Add infrastructure for QIDL-based device serialization List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, Anthony Liguori , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Michael Roth , Blue Swirl , eblake@redhat.com Il 26/09/2012 12:20, Kevin Wolf ha scritto: >>> >> QIDL_DECLARE(RTCState) { >>> >> ISADevice dev qidl(immutable); >>> >> MemoryRegion io qidl(immutable); >> > >> > Just like sparse is a "compiler", so is qidl. We are free to use the >> > '_' + lowercase prefix. >> > >> > ISADevice _immutable dev; >> > >> > It's an established practice in wide-use. > Not commenting on the underscore, but you did one thing that I want to > support: Put the (q)_immutable in a place where it looks like a > qualifier. Not so important for the qidl(...) syntax, but with the > simplified forms I definitely like it better. > > I think I would even have made it '(q)_immutable ISADevice dev;', but > having the field name last is what really matters for readability. Agreed. I don't want to be a nuisance, so: Michael, please pick one between ISADevice QIDL(immutable) dev ISADevice q_immutable dev ISADevice qidl(immutable) dev and if you choose the second, let's make QIDL an implementation detail, i.e. document that every new attribute we introduce should define a new q_* macro. Paolo