On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 11:32:07AM -0500, Michael Roth wrote:
> Quoting David Gibson (2017-06-04 22:31:12)
> > Currently we only have a single QOM type for all DRCs, but lots of
> > places where we switch behaviour based on the DRC's PAPR defined type.
> > This is a poor use of our existing type
Quoting David Gibson (2017-06-04 22:31:12)
> Currently we only have a single QOM type for all DRCs, but lots of
> places where we switch behaviour based on the DRC's PAPR defined type.
> This is a poor use of our existing type system.
>
> So, instead create QOM subclasses for each PAPR defined
Currently we only have a single QOM type for all DRCs, but lots of
places where we switch behaviour based on the DRC's PAPR defined type.
This is a poor use of our existing type system.
So, instead create QOM subclasses for each PAPR defined DRC type. We
also introduce intermediate subclasses
