Re: [MirageOS-devel] Remove DEVICE.connect?

[Anil Madhavapeddy <anil@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 22 Jan 2015, at 14:02, Thomas Gazagnaire <thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>>>>> So, I propose removing connect from the type signatures (but keeping
>>>>> it in the implementations). Then, being given a device only implies
>>>>> the ability to use it, not the ability to create more devices.
>>> 
>>> Can you still easily compose devices together if you don't have a way to 
>>> connect? Who will be responsible for calling the implementation-dependant 
>>> connect function? Only the mirage tool in main.ml? (I guess that's already 
>>> the case)
>> 
>> Yes, code that wants to call connect (such as the generated main.ml)
>> has to know the concrete module type. But this is already the case,
>> because the "id" types are all abstract in V1_LWT.
> 
> indeed, the mirage tool already has to deal with id of various types, so the 
> changes you are proposing should be fine (and saner).
> 
>> It will also mean we can use other signatures for connect (e.g.
>> allowing multiple arguments or optional arguments) if needed.
> 
> That's indeed a good argument. If we don't expose the connect fonction, we 
> can use more complex function creators when needed - that's good (and we 
> already kind of quite do that, for instance to init the http stack where we 
> need to construct callbacks in main.ml)

Sounds like there's consensus here.  Thomas, are you cooking up this patch?   
We might be able to get away with simply hiding the `connect` function and 
revving the signatures, and not doing a lot of minor releases.

-anil


_______________________________________________
MirageOS-devel mailing list
MirageOS-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mirageos-devel