On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 02:35:30PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Mon, 2018-10-08 at 13:09 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > This patch is doing two things. It is moving the code block earlier, > > to let you drop the duplicated virQEMUCapsCacheLookup(). Second it is > > removing the array iteration & just checking one single path instead. > > > > I'd suggest we keep the array iteration, and just move the code. > > The patch has already been merged, so you'd have to partially revert > it to achieve what you suggest. > > As explained elsewhere in the thread, the probability we would ever > need more than one entry in the array is basically zero, so why have > it? If it ever comes the time when we actually need a second entry, > then sure, but now? Just in case? That's pretty much a textbook > example of over-engineering IMHO. > > Anyway, I feel like I've spent way too much time arguing over what > is ultimately a very, very minor detail already, and at the end of > the day I just don't care enough to spend more energy on it. If > either you or Peter want to reintroduce the array, then by all means > go ahead. Oh, I missed that it was already merged. I don't care enough to change it post-merge. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
