Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> writes: > On 07/27/2015 10:09 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > >> >>> I'm sure there are further things that could be done, but at this point, >>> I hope you get my picture, and I'll quit focusing on this particular patch. >> >> We need to decide how much code churn to accept just for making the diff >> of the generated code easier to review. > > At this point, I'd be happy with just adding a script or other > high-level instructions in the commit message that says how to divide a > generated file into pieces (pull out all *List types into one piece, all > typedefs into another, etc) and which can be done both pre- and > post-patch. With pieces in hand, if you can easily compare that each > pair is minimally different, then you have a nice reassurance that the > difference in the overall file is due merely to differences in how the > pieces are interleaved, and not to added or unintentionally dropped > material. As you pointed out, there comes a point of diminishing > returns in trying to clean up code that will just be discarded.
I'll give it a try.
