On 03/30/2016 05:00 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote:
On 03/30/2016 07:10 AM, Cao jin wrote:
Hi,
Yes, I should add more hint message. I don`t quite understand about:
/have a "warning only" error type so the reporting party can decide to
issue a warning or to fail/
Do you mean still using VMW_WRPRN or using error_append_hint? It seems
VMW_WRPRN should only work in debug time? and if user should see this
error message, should use error_report_err ?
No, it is not related to VMW_WRPRN. On this subject, those are debugging
warnings
and we should keep them the same as before.
ok
About the "warning only" error type: if an error is returned, the caller
assumes that the initialization failed and it will return with failure.
That means
that you cannot return a non-null error if you want the process to
finish OK.
This is why you had to:
- report the error (even if this function should not be a reporter
because it receives an Error parameter)
- empty the error: so why use error at all, right?
My point is if the caller had a way to check what kind of error this is
and act accordingly, it would be nicer. But again, this is out of the
scope of this patch, only some thoughts.
I see, and agree.
see what I was told before:
http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-trivial/2015-10/msg00116.html
http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-trivial/2015-10/msg00123.html
Actually I am ok with both sides. I just stop sending coding style
patch since then:)
Oh, I hate when it happens to me, tho different opinions, how can you
deal with that, right ? :)
I don`t know, coding style & indentation patch really matters or is
just a personal taste thing?
Coding style and indentation *are important* IMHO.
Totally, absolutely agree
For this case, what I would do is put the new lines and comments in a
separate patch,\
but send it with *the same* series, not through trivial list, saying
something like:
"fixed some code style problems while resolving the ... problem".
OK
--
Yours Sincerely,
Cao jin
