Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 1/5] Use __stringify() as the only method for performing preprocessor stringificaion

["Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@xxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 9:05 PM
> To: Wu, Feng
> Cc: andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx; ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx;
> stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxx; keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx; tim@xxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 1/5] Use __stringify() as the only method 
> for
> performing preprocessor stringificaion
> 
> >>> On 03.06.14 at 14:37, <feng.wu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Wu, Feng
> >> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 8:43 AM
> >> To: Jan Beulich; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Cc: ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx; andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx; tim@xxxxxxx;
> >> keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx; stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxx;
> >> boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx
> >> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 1/5] Use __stringify() as the only 
> >> method
> > for
> >> performing preprocessor stringificaion
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeulich@xxxxxxxx]
> >> > Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 7:36 PM
> >> > To: Wu, Feng; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> > Cc: andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx; ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx;
> >> > stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxx; keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx;
> >> > boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx; tim@xxxxxxx
> >> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] Use __stringify() as the only method for
> >> performing
> >> > preprocessor stringificaion
> >> >
> >> > >>> Feng Wu <feng.wu@xxxxxxxxx> 05/30/14 10:59 AM >>>
> >> > >There are two ways of performing preprocessor stringificaion in the
> >> > >current code: __stringify() from stringify.h, and STR() from config.h.
> >> > >This patch consolidates down to one.
> >> >
> >> > Looking at the changes here I'm not really sure we want this as is. Is
> >> > there anything going to break in the rest of the series if this patch was
> >> > left out?
> >>
> >> I think nothing will be broken without this patch. Andrew finds there are
> > two
> >> different
> >> ways for handling this, and tend to unify them to one. This is the story.
> >
> > Andrew & Jan, do you have any final decision about this change?
> 
> As you've seen I applied the other patches in this series, but not this
> one. If such a cleanup was done, it should imo be done such that at
> the same time stringification gets dropped where pointlessly used, i.e.
> the set of use cases should get reduced to the bare minimum needed.
> And personally I have no problem gradually fading out STR() instead
> of doing this with a separate patch, thus reducing overall code churn.
> 
> Jan

Okay, got it, thanks for the explanation!

Thanks,
Feng


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel