On 04/05/17 21:36, Ola Liljedahl wrote: > On 5 April 2017 at 17:33, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov > <dmitry.ereminsoleni...@linaro.org> wrote: >> On 05.04.2017 17:40, Ola Liljedahl wrote: >>> On 5 April 2017 at 14:20, Maxim Uvarov <maxim.uva...@linaro.org> wrote: >>>> On 04/05/17 01:46, Ola Liljedahl wrote: >>>>> On 4 April 2017 at 21:25, Maxim Uvarov <maxim.uva...@linaro.org> wrote: >>>>>> it's better to have 2 separate files for that. One for ODP_CONFIG_LLDSCD >>>>> "better"? In what way? >>> Please respond to the question. If you claim something is "better", >>> you must be able to explain *why* it is better. >>> >>> *We* have explained why we think it is better to keep both >>> implementations in the same file, close to each other. I think Brian's >>> explanation was very good. >> >> Because it allows one to overview a complete implementation at once >> instead of switching between two different modes. > That's a good argument as well. It doesn't mean that the > implementations should live in separate files. > > We keep both implementations in the same file but avoid interleaving > the different functions (as is done now). This is actually what some > one in our team wanted. >
If it's 2 files which differ for something that it's possible to diff both files. Interleaving code is very hard to read and understand. If it's 2 files then you can compile needed file and not compile not needed. I.e. you don't need to use these ifdefs. And you always know which way compiler went. I'm not saying that it has to be exactly 2 files. Might be 3 - 1 common file a 2 with difference. btw, why all that functions are inline? Maxim. >> >> -- >> With best wishes >> Dmitry
