lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: trace/events: DECLARE vs DEFINE semantic


    Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
    > * H. Peter Anvin (hpa@zytor.com) wrote:
    >> On 12/02/2009 02:57 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> TRACE_CLASS - Declares a class
    >>>> TRACE_CLASS_EVENT - defines an event for said class
    >>>> TRACE_EVENT - Declares a class and defines an event (as is today)
    >>>
    >>> Yep, it looks good! It's self-descriptive and don't require to explain
    >>> what the thing is doing each time we refer to it. (however I feel a bit
    >>> sad for Fred, Wilma and Barney) ;)
    >>>
    >>
    >> Although you have to admit it's a bit confusing that:
    >>
    >> TRACE_EVENT = TRACE_CLASS + TRACE_CLASS_EVENT
    >>
    >> ... as opposed to ...
    >>
    >> TRACE_CLASS_EVENT = TRACE_CLASS + TRACE_EVENT
    >>
    >> -hpa
    >
    > Then I would say that TRACE_EVENT should probably not have the
    > side-effect of declaring a globally-reuseable class. Maybe under the
    > hood it could create a privately-named class, but I don't see how it can
    > be re-used by following TRACE_CLASS_EVENT without causing confusion.
    >
    > I'd go for:
    >
    > TRACE_CLASS - Declares/defines a class
    > TRACE_CLASS_EVENT - Declares/defines an event for said class
    > TRACE_EVENT - Declares/defines a private class and declares/defines an event

    Agreed, I'd rather like this naming. :-)

    Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>

    Thank you!

    --
    Masami Hiramatsu

    Software Engineer
    Hitachi Computer Products (America), Inc.
    Software Solutions Division

    e-mail: mhiramat@redhat.com



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-12-03 04:25    [W:0.022 / U:126.540 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site