[PATCH 3/5] scanner: introduce --object-type option

[Emil Velikov]

On 22 August 2017 at 14:02, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 18 August 2017 at 13:05, Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> >
>>> > The exported configuration would then be:
>>> > LOCAL_INTERFACE_DECL=extern
>>> > EXTERN_INTERFACE_DECL=extern
>>> > LOCAL_INTERFACE_DEF=WL_EXPORT
>>> >
>>> > That would be far too flexible and no-one would use it right, right?
>>> >
>>> I did not introduce separate tokens, since those are (and should be)
>>> used _only_ in the .c file.
>>> Personally then do not seem necessary, If you prefer we can add them though.
>>
>> Ah, no, that was just a wild idea of something completely different. I
>> meant that the user project would be setting those macros before using
>> scanner-generated files, and if unset, the scanner-emitted code would
>> default to the legacy behaviour. That way there would be no visibility
>> modes in scanner itself. If it's not obviously better, then nevermind.
>> It certainly has a lot more room to go wrong than your proposal.
>>
>>
> I see.
>
> Personally I'd lean towards with my approach for now since it is
> simpler, despite that it provides less flexibility.
> As you pointed out the proposal is a bit more fragile, so might be
> better to avoid until there's a real need for it.
>
>
>> ...
>>
>>> > The patch looks pretty much correct to me, if we choose to go this way.
>>> >
>>> Glad to hear.
>>>
>>> I'll let me know once you guys are settled in on the approach, and
>>> I'll respin the series with all the comments addressed.
>>
>> Cool, let's see if we can get the name conflict issue solved, and then
>> I'll try to remember to ping you.
>>
> Ack, I'll keep an eye open, just in case.
>
Considering the status of the the name conflict series, should I
re-spin this lot?
I'm more than happy to tweak things - say rename the toggle, etc.

Thanks
Emil