> > On Wed, 2018-05-09 at 05:10 -0400, Frediano Ziglio wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, 2018-05-06 at 13:29 +0100, Frediano Ziglio wrote: > > > > Signed-off-by: Frediano Ziglio <fziglio@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > python_modules/ptypes.py | 9 --------- > > > > 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/python_modules/ptypes.py b/python_modules/ptypes.py > > > > index d29c97a..209c00e 100644 > > > > --- a/python_modules/ptypes.py > > > > +++ b/python_modules/ptypes.py > > > > @@ -145,9 +145,6 @@ class Type: > > > > def has_name(self): > > > > return self.name != None > > > > > > > > - def get_type(self, recursive=False): > > > > - return self > > > > - > > > > def is_primitive(self): > > > > return False > > > > > > > > @@ -256,12 +253,6 @@ class TypeAlias(Type): > > > > self.the_type = the_type > > > > self.attributes = fix_attributes(attribute_list) > > > > > > > > - def get_type(self, recursive=False): > > > > - if recursive: > > > > - return self.the_type.get_type(True) > > > > - else: > > > > - return self.the_type > > > > - > > > > def primitive_type(self): > > > > return self.the_type.primitive_type() > > > > > > It seems these methods might be there for "API completeness" of the > > > classes and therefore perhaps better to keep them there (though I > > > didn't really go and see how much sense it makes). But if you > > > insist, > > > > > > Acked-by: Lukáš Hrázký <lhrazky@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > (might also wanna wait a bit to see if someone holds special > > > feelings > > > for them :)) > > > > > > > I found confusing that a Type class has a "get_type" method :-) > > Looking around looks like this maybe was replaced by "resolve" method > > which find the right concrete type. > > > > Frediano > > _______________________________________________ > > Spice-devel mailing list > > Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel > > > For changes to the code generation scripts, I would find it useful to > provide a diff between the generated code. I know it's extra work for > the author, but it would make it a bit easier for the reviewer to > understand the impact of the change. (I guess in this case, there would > be no diff, right?) Yes, being unused in this case nothing changed in the generated code. Does not take much to get a diff before and after, is reasonable, at least some of the diff if is going to change a lot. > > Also: it would be interesting to know how you realized these were > unused? In other words: why were you looking at this code? > Discussing with Lukash I was trying to understand a way to extend a message and I was looking at the code. I don't exactly remember why I manage to finish to look for these methods. Did a grep, nothing. A grep in the full git history and they were never used (at least in git history). Trying remove them causes no changes (not that I expected something else, just making sure everything was fine). Considering that is at least 8 years that they are not used I removed them. > Jonathon > Frediano _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel