Re: [PATCH] attr: mark a file-local symbol as static

From: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>
Date: Jan 19, 2017, 01:22 UTC
Message-ID: <993c0278-03ae-a28a-df29-beed9864a4ae@ramsayjones.plus.com>
In-Reply-To: <20170118230541.GE10641@google.com>

On 18/01/17 23:05, Brandon Williams wrote:

Show 28 quoted lines

> On 01/18, Ramsay Jones wrote:
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>
>> ---
>>
>> Hi Brandon,
>>
>> If you need to re-roll your 'bw/attr' branch, could you please
>> squash this into the relevant patch (commit 8908457159,
>> "attr: use hashmap for attribute dictionary", 12-01-2017).
>>
>> Also, I note that, although they are declared as part of the
>> public attr api, attr_check_clear() and attr_check_reset() are
>> also not called outside of attr.c. Are these functions part of
>> the public api?
>>
>> Also, a minor point, but attr_check_reset() is called (line 1050)
>> before it's definition (line 1114). This is not a problem, given
>> the declaration in attr.h, but I prefer definitions to come before
>> use, where possible.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> ATB,
>> Ramsay Jones
> 
> Yes of course, I believe Stefan also pointed that out earlier today so I
> have it fixed locally.

Yep, I noticed Stefan's email just a few minutes after I hit send! ;-)

Show 6 quoted lines

> For attr_check_clear() and attr_check_reset() the intent is that they
> are the accepted way to either clear or reset the attr_check structure.
> Currently most users of the attribute system don't have a need to clear
> or reset the structure but there could be future callers who need that
> functionality.  If you feel like they shouldn't be part of the api right
> now then I'm open to changing that for this series.

No, I just wanted to check that they were intended to be part of the public api and that you anticipate additional callers in the future.

[I would still prefer definitions before use, but many people would not agree with me, so ...]

ATB, Ramsay Jones