A long time ago we talked about making some sort of hierarchy for  
SimObjects so that they could mirror the namespaces in C++. That way I  
wouldn't have to put IntelMP at the beginning of the name of all the  
Intel MP table objects. In that case we'd want the python  
package/directory structure to mirror the C++ namespaces more than the  
C++ file hierarchy.

Gabe

Quoting nathan binkert <[email protected]>:

> Hi Steve/everyone,
>
> right now, we have code in src/python/swig.  I'm thinking that for the
> swig stuff, we should distribute the .i files along with the code they
> wrap.  Mostly this means that swig code goes in sim.  I'm thinking
> about this because I was going to add a .i file or two and wanted to
> do the right thing.  Along these lines, should I rename .i files to
> .ii to indicate C++?
>
> Additionally, there's a question about src/python/m5. I'm inclined to
> leave it alone because it is actually a python package that we build.
> Arguably, we might want to rename python to lib, but I could be
> convinced that this is a bad idea.  I guess it just feels odd to have
> a directory called python.
>
> Finally, right now, SimObjects are compiled into a flat namespace
> called m5.objects.  It seems that we should have some package
> hierarchy here to potentially mirror the C++ file hierarchy (and to
> get rid of the practice of prepending the ISA to the name of many
> objects).  It would also help prevent name clashes with any EXTRAS
> people might create.
>
> These things come up because I'm actively working on the build system
> which would touch many of these things.
>
>   Nate
> _______________________________________________
> m5-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
>


_______________________________________________
m5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev

Reply via email to