> -----Original Message----- > From: Dumitrescu, Cristian [mailto:cristian.dumitre...@intel.com] > Both approaches can support this. Therefore, IMO the separator char is not > enough to justify approach 1. I would only go for approach 1 if there are > some other parameters that we could consider adding to the load function > now or later. Do you see any?
No, I don't have any future parameters in mind but that doesn't mean that none will arise eventually. IMO, the comment character should be specified as an actual "char" in the rte_cfgfile_params. Specifying it as a flag is a bit kludgy - I don't like overloading a flag/enum to specify something that already has a type that can be used (char). Also, I don't think we need to control which comment characters are valid. If the app wants to use a 'X' then that's their choice.
