Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 07 of 10] pyxl: Recursively scan type-tree to produce complete binding boilerplate

[Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 12 Jan 2011, Gianni Tedesco wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 19:26 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Gianni Tedesco writes ("[Xen-devel] [PATCH 07 of 10] pyxl: Recursively scan 
> > type-tree to produce complete binding boilerplate"):
> > > pyxl: Recursively scan type-tree to produce complete binding boilerplate
> >
> > I applied patches 1-6.  They touch only pyxl and didn't break the
> > build.
> >
> > However patch 7 contains this:
> >
> > > --- a/tools/libxl/libxl.idl Tue Jan 11 16:01:07 2011 +0000
> > > +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl.idl Tue Jan 11 16:01:08 2011 +0000
> > ...
> > > -                                        ("features", string, True),
> > > +                                        ("features", string),
> >
> > This makes a substantive change to both the interface and the
> > generated code, and wasn't mentioned in the comment.  I'm not
> > convinced it's a change that's appropriate during feature freeze.
> 
> We discussed this off-list at the time I was writing it. I think with
> one of the other guys. We decided that const char * in the interface was
> a bad idea since it imposed an allocation policy where no reason for it
> actually existed in the code. I could have worked around this by casting
> everything in the python bindings but we felt that was an ugly solution
> and not a good precedent to set.
> 

I might have verbally misled Gianni to think that a change like this
would be appropriate.
Bu thinking twice about it, even though it appears correct and it is
just one line, it doesn't meet the criteria.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel