Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> writes: > On 09/16/2015 05:06 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> The visitor will help keeping the code generation code simple and >> reasonably separated from QAPISchema details. >> >> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> >> --- >> scripts/qapi.py | 64 >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+) >> > >> @@ -840,6 +876,10 @@ class QAPISchemaEnumType(QAPISchemaType): >> def json_type(self): >> return 'string' >> >> + def visit(self, visitor): >> + visitor.visit_enum_type(self.name, self.info, >> + self.values, self.prefix) > > Thinking aloud: Should this visit 'self.prefix or self.name', rather > than letting callers see None? If we did that, we could simplify > c_enum_const() back to 2 parameters, and update all callers to just > blindly pass the prefix instead of the enum name. On the other hand, I > think that's a bit too much churn, and I don't see what it would buy us > that we don't already have with a 3-arg c_enum_const().
Could be explored on top. We need to wrap up this series. > So I'm fine with the version you have here as-is (modulo any obvious > rebase to pass self._prefix based on my comments on 2). > > Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> Thanks!
