[<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