Stefan Hajnoczi writes:
> On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 12:19:08AM +0200, Lluís Vilanova wrote:
>> trace.h-timestamp: $(SRC_PATH)/trace-events $(BUILD_DIR)/config-host.mak
>> - $(call quiet-command,$(PYTHON) $(SRC_PATH)/scripts/tracetool.py
>> --format=h --backend=$(TRACE_BACKEND) < $< > $@," GEN trace.h")
>> - @cmp -s $@ trace.h || cp $@ trace.h
>> + $(call tracetool-gen,h,$(TRACE_BACKEND))
>> + $(call tracetool-ci)
> Here I don't think it's worth introducing an abstraction. While there
> is a pattern I think the abstraction actually hides what is going on
> rather than being useful. The macros are hiding output generation, I
> find that especially troubling because you can't really tell what is
> going to happen. It's clearer to leave these statements open coded.
I just thought it was excessively verbose. Would it work for you making it more
explicit?
$(call tracetool-gen,$<,$@,h,$(TRACE_BACKEND))
$(call tracetool-ci,$@)
The main points bugging me were:
* use of "quiet-command" plus explicit quiet compilation string (" GEN
whatever").
* use of "$(PYTHON) $(SRC_PATH)/scripts/tracetool.py".
If not, I'll just drop it and instead simply replace calls to tracetool with
"$(TRACETOOL)".
Lluis
--
"And it's much the same thing with knowledge, for whenever you learn
something new, the whole world becomes that much richer."
-- The Princess of Pure Reason, as told by Norton Juster in The Phantom
Tollbooth
