Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 16 Dec 2015 08:55:52 +0100 | From | Jiri Olsa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 10/14] perf tools: Enable indices setting syntax for BPF maps |
| |
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:02:28AM +0800, Wangnan (F) wrote: > > > On 2015/12/15 21:42, Jiri Olsa wrote: > >On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:39:19AM +0000, Wang Nan wrote: > >>This patch introduce a new syntax to perf event parser: > >> > >> # perf record -e './test_bpf_map_3.c/maps:channel.value[0,1,2,3...5]=101/' usleep 2 > >why 3 dots? I'd think the standard is 2 ? > > The standard (actually it is a gcc extension, not C standard) is 3 dots. > Please have a look at [1] and [2]. Although I also think '..' is better. > > So after you seeing this, do you still think we should follow our > intuition instead of following GCC? If you still prefer '..' I'll > change it.
I'm ok with '...'
I think I only thought about '..' as a standard because of the way I use git log ;-)
thanks, jirka
> > Thank you. > > [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/11/23/4 > [2] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Case-Ranges.html > > Thank you. > > >just curious > > [0,1,2,3..5] > >3 made me think there's something speecial about it ;-) > > > > > >jirka > >
| |