Re: Michael Paquier
> >> + * Note that the argument types are enforced for the per-field custom
> >> + * functions.
> >> + */
> >> +#define JUMBLE_CUSTOM(nodetype, item) \
> >> + _jumble##nodetype##_##item(jstate, expr, expr->item)
>
> In this one, I want to mean that we require a custom per-field
> function to look like that:
> _jumbleNodefoo_field(JumbleState *jstate, NodeFoo *expr, FieldType field);
>
> Rather than having more generic shape like that:
> _jumbleNodefoo_field(JumbleState *jstate, Node *exp,
> const unsigned char *item, Size size);
>
> So a custom function is defined so as the node type and field type are
> arguments. Perhaps this comment would be better if reworded like
> that:
> "The arguments of this function use the node type and the field type,
> rather than a generic argument like AppendJumble() and the other
> _jumble() functions."
Perhaps this:
/*
* The per-field custom jumble functions get jstate, the node, and the
* field as arguments.
*/
They are not actually different from _jumbleList and _jumbleA_Const
which also get the node (and just not the field). AppendJumble is a
different layer, the output, so it's not surprising its signature is
different.
Are we at the point where the patch is already Ready for Committer?
Thanks,
Christoph
