[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] qnum: qnum_value_is_equal() function
From: |
Eduardo Habkost |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] qnum: qnum_value_is_equal() function |
Date: |
Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:21:52 -0500 |
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 08:53:19PM +0400, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 7:49 PM Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 12:42:47PM +0400, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 2:42 AM Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Extract the QNum value comparison logic to a function that takes
> > > > QNumValue* as argument.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > include/qapi/qmp/qnum.h | 1 +
> > > > qobject/qnum.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++----------
> > > > 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/include/qapi/qmp/qnum.h b/include/qapi/qmp/qnum.h
> > > > index 62fbdfda68..0327ecd0f0 100644
> > > > --- a/include/qapi/qmp/qnum.h
> > > > +++ b/include/qapi/qmp/qnum.h
> > > > @@ -106,6 +106,7 @@ double qnum_get_double(const QNum *qn);
> > > >
> > > > char *qnum_to_string(QNum *qn);
> > > >
> > > > +bool qnum_value_is_equal(const QNumValue *num_x, const QNumValue
> > *num_y);
> > > > bool qnum_is_equal(const QObject *x, const QObject *y);
> > > > void qnum_destroy_obj(QObject *obj);
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/qobject/qnum.c b/qobject/qnum.c
> > > > index f80d4efd76..6a0f948b16 100644
> > > > --- a/qobject/qnum.c
> > > > +++ b/qobject/qnum.c
> > > > @@ -207,9 +207,9 @@ char *qnum_to_string(QNum *qn)
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > /**
> > > > - * qnum_is_equal(): Test whether the two QNums are equal
> > > > - * @x: QNum object
> > > > - * @y: QNum object
> > > > + * qnum_value_is_equal(): Test whether two QNumValues are equal
> > > > + * @num_x: QNum value
> > > > + * @num_y: QNum value
> > > >
> > >
> > > val_x: a QNumValue ?
> >
> > Do you mean:
> > @num_x: a QNumValue
> >
> ?
> >
> > I was not planning to rename the existing num_x/num_y variables.
> >
> >
> Not renaming because that would make some churn? But this is already quite
> confusing, so it's better to use "val" for QNumVal and "num" for QNum I
> guess.
>
> If you don't want to rename it in the code, may I suggest doing it at the
> declaration side? Not sure it's a better idea.
Yeah, I was not renaming them just to avoid churn.
However, I'm already replacing `qn` variables with `qv` at patch
3/8. Replacing num_x/num_y with val_x/val_y at qnum_is_equal()
(at patch 3/8 as well) wouldn't hurt too much.
--
Eduardo
[PATCH v2 4/8] qnum: qnum_value_is_equal() function, Eduardo Habkost, 2020/11/16
Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] qnum: qnum_value_is_equal() function, Markus Armbruster, 2020/11/19
[PATCH v2 7/8] qom: Make object_property_set_default() public, Eduardo Habkost, 2020/11/16
[PATCH v2 8/8] qom: Use qlit to represent property defaults, Eduardo Habkost, 2020/11/16
[PATCH v2 6/8] qlit: qlit_type() function, Eduardo Habkost, 2020/11/16