Re: Michael Paquier > >> + * Note that the argument types are enforced for the per-field custom > >> + * functions. > >> + */ > >> +#define JUMBLE_CUSTOM(nodetype, item) \ > >> + _jumble##nodetype##_##item(jstate, expr, expr->item) > > In this one, I want to mean that we require a custom per-field > function to look like that: > _jumbleNodefoo_field(JumbleState *jstate, NodeFoo *expr, FieldType field); > > Rather than having more generic shape like that: > _jumbleNodefoo_field(JumbleState *jstate, Node *exp, > const unsigned char *item, Size size); > > So a custom function is defined so as the node type and field type are > arguments. Perhaps this comment would be better if reworded like > that: > "The arguments of this function use the node type and the field type, > rather than a generic argument like AppendJumble() and the other > _jumble() functions."
Perhaps this: /* * The per-field custom jumble functions get jstate, the node, and the * field as arguments. */ They are not actually different from _jumbleList and _jumbleA_Const which also get the node (and just not the field). AppendJumble is a different layer, the output, so it's not surprising its signature is different. Are we at the point where the patch is already Ready for Committer? Thanks, Christoph
