Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> writes: > On 24/08/2017 12:09, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Cut-and-paste cuts both ways (pardon the pun): >> >> initialize with QTestState A >> frobnicate with QTestState A >> glomnify with QTestState A >> frobnicate with QTestState A >> initialize with QTestState B >> boingboing with QTestState B >> finalize with QTestState A >> finalize with QTestState A >> >> Uh, forgot to frobnicate after boingboing, let me fix that real quick! >> >> initialize with QTestState A >> frobnicate with QTestState A >> glomnify with QTestState A >> frobnicate with QTestState A >> initialize with QTestState B >> boingboing with QTestState B >> frobnicate with QTestState A >> finalize with QTestState A >> finalize with QTestState A >> >> Spot the pasto. >> >> This hasty paste would simply work with global_qtest. I'm not claiming >> there are cases that are just the opposite. I'm just challenging your >> apparent claim that the long forms help with avoiding or catching >> pastos. Can you explain how they help more than they hurt? > > A pasto without global_qtest is local. > > But cut-and-paste that involves _assigning_ global_qtest, even if it > doesn't have cut-and-paste mistakes, may create a mess of functions > knowing^Wbelieving they know what global_qtest is. > > Assigning global_qtest means the short-form functions have effectively > dynamic binding. In a perfect world, global_qtest would be static and > the create-and-assign-global would assert(!global_qtest). Then >1 VM -> > don't use the short forms.
No consensus, status quo wins by default. Since I find work of maintaining that status quo quite aggravating, I'll do my best to dump it one someone with different sensibilities.
