Re: trace/events: DECLARE vs DEFINE semantic

[Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 15:08 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 12/02/2009 02:57 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >>
> >> TRACE_CLASS - Declares a class
> >> TRACE_CLASS_EVENT - defines an event for said class
> >> TRACE_EVENT - Declares a class and defines an event (as is today)
> > 
> > Yep, it looks good! It's self-descriptive and don't require to explain
> > what the thing is doing each time we refer to it. (however I feel a bit
> > sad for Fred, Wilma and Barney) ;)
> > 
> 
> Although you have to admit it's a bit confusing that:
> 
> TRACE_EVENT = TRACE_CLASS + TRACE_CLASS_EVENT
> 
> ... as opposed to ...
> 
> TRACE_CLASS_EVENT = TRACE_CLASS + TRACE_EVENT

Fred, Wilma and Barney are sounding better by the second.

So, would you think:

TRACE_CLASS - Declare a class
TRACE_EVENT - defines an event for said class (different meaning than before)
TRACE_CLASS_EVENT - Declares a class and an event

is the better naming?

-- Steve


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html