Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2 of 2] RFC: libxl: move definition of libxl_domain_config into the IDL

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ian Campbell writes ("[Xen-devel] [PATCH 2 of 2] RFC: libxl: move definition of 
libxl_domain_config into the IDL"):
> RFC: libxl: move definition of libxl_domain_config into the IDL
> 
> This requires adding a new Array type to the IDL.
> 
> DO NOT APPLY. This is 4.3 material.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>

Acked-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> +  idl.Array.len_var contains an idl.Field which is added to the parent
> +  idl.Aggregate and will contain the length of the array.

Why does the Array not automatically invent a "num_<foo>" field ?
Surely there is no benefit to having non-systematically named (or
typed) array count fields ?

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel