Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 10/22] virsh: Introduce new hypervisor-cpu-compare command
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 12:35:09PM +0200, Jiri Denemark wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 13:24:25 -0400, Collin Walling wrote:
> On 05/16/2018 04:39 AM, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> > This command is a virsh wrapper for virConnectCompareHypervisorCPU.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar(a)redhat.com>
> > ---
> > tools/virsh-host.c | 113 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > tools/virsh.pod | 29 +++++++++++-
> > 2 files changed, 141 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/virsh-host.c b/tools/virsh-host.c
> > index ea2c411c02..1e7cfcbd5e 100644
> > --- a/tools/virsh-host.c
> > +++ b/tools/virsh-host.c
> > @@ -1595,6 +1595,113 @@ cmdNodeMemoryTune(vshControl *ctl, const vshCmd *cmd)
> > goto cleanup;
> > }
> >
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * "hypervisor-cpu-compare" command
> > + */
>
> Really just a nit:
>
> I'm somewhat torn by the verbose command name. "hypervisor-" is a bit
cumbersome,
> but hy<tab> will auto-complete it for you at this point. Maybe shorten it to
hv-cpu-compare?
Yeah, hv-* is definitely shorter, but I don't know if it's better. What
do others think?
Since you asked (and as a heavy `virsh` user) ... although I like
shorter commands, I go by "explicit is better than implicit" (within
reason) with written text. FWIW, I lean towards the full spelling
'hypervisor'; one less acronym to auto-expand in your head.
[...]
--
/kashyap