On 10/21/2011 06:41 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 10/20/2011 04:20 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 12:14:57PM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
On 09/29/2011 06:22 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
The improvements to virBuffer, along with a paradigm shift to pass the original buffer through rather than creating a second buffer, allow us to shave off quite a few lines of code.
I'd squash in the attached patch, but it's not necessary as it gets rid of non automatic indentation whitespace, but makes the code look cleaner :)
I'm not entirely convinced this is a good idea. This means that when looking at the code, it is no longer obvious what the nesting of XML elements is supposed to be - they are all the level.
I concur with Daniel here - I debated about dropping the leading whitespace and using a lot more virBufferAdjustIndent when first writing this series (since it would have been less work to convert from my v1, where I had already removed all the leading whitespace anyways), but it just doesn't scale as well. My end decision was to only remove whitespace and start at level 0 just for the functions that can be called from multiple locations; single-use call-chains were easier to keep indented as they were before the series.
The only reason I used virBufferAdjustIndent inside virSysinfoProcessorFormat, against the rule of thumb that I generally used of keeping the in-function indentation, was to fit things in 80 columns.
I agree with you and that's a reasonable reason.:-)
ACK, virBufferEscapeString nicely simplifies the code :)
Pushed.