[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <30ddfc7f-4b13-4caf-8859-2cd2e72ef878@sedlak.dev>
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2024 11:14:59 +0100
From: Daniel Sedlak <daniel@...lak.dev>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
 guilherme giacomo simoes <trintaeoitogc@...il.com>,
 Wayne Campbell <wcampbell1995@...il.com>
Cc: ojeda@...nel.org, alex.gaynor@...il.com, boqun.feng@...il.com,
 gary@...yguo.net, bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com, benno.lossin@...ton.me,
 a.hindborg@...nel.org, aliceryhl@...gle.com, tmgross@...ch.edu,
 walmeida@...rosoft.com, fujita.tomonori@...il.com,
 tahbertschinger@...il.com, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [PATCH] rust: macros: add authors
On 12/6/24 9:17 PM, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> There are several ways we could do this:
> 
>    - A single field, that only accepts a list.
> 
>    - A single field that accepts both a string or a list.
Since module is a macro, if we would allow syntax in the macro like:
	authors: ["author1", "author2", ...]
I think we could fight with the code formatting, because when it comes 
to the rust macros, rustfmt is often very confused and we could end up 
with variations like:
	authors: ["author1", "author2",
			"author3"]
or
	authors: [
		   "author1",
		   "author2",
		  ]
and rustfmt would be totally ok with both of them.
> 
>    - Two fields like this (that cannot coexist).
> 
>    - Accepting several "author" fields and append them all into a list.
> 
I think accepting several "author" fields is the best one because it 
mirrors the C API, where in C when you want to specify more authors you 
just repeat the MODULE_AUTHOR("author<N>") macro.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
 
