qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] a suggestion to place *.c hunks last in patches


From: Laszlo Ersek
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] a suggestion to place *.c hunks last in patches
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 16:26:14 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.0

On 11/30/16 16:08, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 11:08:27AM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>> Recent git releases support the diff.orderFile permanent setting. (In
>> older releases, the -O option had to be specified on the command line,
>> or in aliases, for the same effect, which was quite inconvenient.) From
>> git-diff(1):
>>
>>        -O<orderfile>
>>            Output the patch in the order specified in the <orderfile>,
>>            which has one shell glob pattern per line. This overrides
>>            the diff.orderFile configuration variable (see git-
>>            config(1)). To cancel diff.orderFile, use -O/dev/null.
>>
>> In my experience, an order file such as:
>>
>> configure
>> *Makefile*
> 
> Why add the * before Makefile? In fact, why * after it?

Might not be appropriate for QEMU indeed; I have that pattern because of
files in other projects. (Actually, thanks for drawing my attention to
it, because it should be *[Mm]akefile* :))

Thanks
Laszlo

>> *.json
>> *.txt
>> *.h
>> *.c
>>
>> that is, a priority order that goes from
>> descriptive/declarative/abstract to imperative/specific works wonders
>> for reviewing.
>>
>> Randomly picked example:
>>
>> [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] virtio-gpu: track and limit host memory allocations
>> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-11/msg05144.html
>>
>> This patch adds several fields to several structures first, and then it
>> does things with those new fields. If you think about what the English
>> verb "to declare" means, it's clear you want to see the declaration
>> first (same as the compiler), and only then how the field is put to use.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Laszlo




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]