Auger Eric <eric.au...@redhat.com> writes: > Hi Markus, > > On 6/22/20 1:22 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Eric Auger <eric.au...@redhat.com> writes: >> >>> Introduce a new property defining a reserved region: >>> <low address>, <high address>, <type>. [...] >> I dimly remember discussing the wisdom of numeric type here, dig, dig, >> ..., aha: >> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH for-5.0 v11 12/20] qapi: Introduce >> DEFINE_PROP_INTERVAL >> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 11:03:02 +0100 >> Message-ID: <87y2vg4k6h....@dusky.pond.sub.org> >> >> >> So the "label" part of "<low address>,<high address>,label" is a >> number? >> > yes it is. >> >> >> >> Is a number appropriate for your use case, or would an enum be better? >> > I think a number is OK. There might be other types of reserved regions >> > in the future. Also if we want to allow somebody else to reuse that >> > property in another context, I would rather leave it open? >> >> I'd prioritize the user interface over possible reuse (which might never >> happen). Mind, I'm not telling you using numbers is a bad user >> interface. In general, enums are nicer, but I don't know enough about >> this particular case. > Yep I remember too ;-) I left as it was because I think this property > could be used for other use cases.
YAGNI :) A string would work, too, wouldn't it? [...]
