Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 06/13] fuzz/x86_emulate: Rename the file containing the wrapper code

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 10/05/2017 10:01 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 04.10.17 at 18:34, <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 10/04/2017 09:23 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 25.09.17 at 16:26, <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> --- a/tools/fuzz/x86_instruction_emulator/Makefile
>>>> +++ b/tools/fuzz/x86_instruction_emulator/Makefile
>>>> @@ -18,22 +18,22 @@ asm:
>>>>  
>>>>  asm/%: asm ;
>>>>  
>>>> -x86_emulate.c x86_emulate.h: %:
>>>> +x86_emulate_user.c x86_emulate_user.h: %:
>>>
>>> How about avoiding the names getting even longer? E.g. using
>>> x86-emulate.[ch] or x86emul-user.[ch] instead?
>>
>> My original idea was to make it easy to construct the original filename
>> from the long filename.  I don't have super-strong opinions (mostly
>> because I think all the options I've seen are pretty bad), but I still
>> think that this is the least-bad option.
>>
>> If you have strong opinions about one of the other ones, let me know and
>> I'll change it.
> 
> Well, together with the suggested alternatives being shorter,
> they also slightly improve word completion behavior when typing
> in partial file names, so yes, I'd really appreciate renaming them
> (and I've listed the suggestions above in the order of my
> preference).

Ok.

> 
>>>> @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ all: x86-insn-fuzz-all
>>>>  
>>>>  .PHONY: distclean
>>>>  distclean: clean
>>>> -  rm -f x86_emulate x86_emulate.c x86_emulate.h asm
>>>> +  rm -f x86_emulate x86_emulate_user.c x86_emulate_user.h asm
>>>
>>> If you want to stick to the longer names, would you mind taking the
>>> opportunity to make this just x86_emulate* ?
>>
>> What if you put something in that directly called
>> "x86_emulate_user.c.diff" (or something like that) and then ran "make
>> clean"?
>>
>> I tend to think that 'make clean' should only clean things that it is
>> pretty confident were put there by the build system, and not the user.
> 
> Ah, yes, I see your point, albeit I don't fully agree: I would
> actually prefer "make clean" to leave a clean tree, not one
> with user created files left in. But indeed that's a matter of
> taste.

Well if that's the case we should have a whitelist, and do something
like "ls -a | (filter whitelist) | xargs rm -f".  But I think `git clean
-ffdx` does that job for most people these days.

 -George

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