[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 08/10] libxl: introduce libxl_get_memory_static_max
Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [PATCH v1 08/10] libxl: introduce libxl_get_memory_static_max"): > On Thu, 2014-07-17 at 13:02 +0100, Wei Liu wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:47:08AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > It looks to me like this could instead be a common helper function, with > > > a simple boolean parameter. > > > > Ian J likes macro while you likes functions. I'm fine with anything that > > works. :-) > > I think Ian prefers macros over repetition, but not at the expense of a > helper function. IOW macros only when the function is impossible. At > least I hope that's the case! Yes. I am indeed allergic to repetition. Repetition should be avoided by the use of helper functions if possible; or helper functions with helper macros; or failing that just macros; or failing that with code autogeneration run from the build system. So I agree with Ian C that if you can shrink the proportion of the code in the macros that's probably a good thing, unless it seems to break things up so much it makes them more confusing. Note also that there are complicated rules about pointer casting - particularly about calling a function through a pointer which has been cast from one function pointer type to another. Thanks, Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |