Web lists-archives.com

Re: [PATCH 1/2] trace: add trace_print_string_list_key




Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> I separated this from the other series, making it into 2 patches:
> This first patch adds tracing for string lists and the next patch that
> removes the unused function from the string list API.
> That way we can decide on these two patches separately if needed.

Of course, even though these are 1/2 and 2/2, only one of them and
not both would apply.

Thanks for sticking to the topic.  

Given how simple that "dump them to standard output" code is, I am
inclined to say that anybody who needs to inspect the contents of
string list at various points in the code under development can
create one from scratch even if we did not have this implementation,
so perhaps 2/2 is a better choice between the two.

It is not costing us much to leave it in the code.  It's not like
the function costed a lot of maintenance burden since it was added
in 8fd2cb40 ("Extract helper bits from c-merge-recursive work",
2006-07-25), so the alternative #3 might be to do nothing.

I have no strong preference between #2 and #3.  The benefit of #2
compared to #3 is that, if we remove it today, there will not be
somebody else in the future to come and propose removing the
otherwise unused function, which would cost us time to review and
discuss, so unless somebody stops me, I am inclined to say we'd take
2/2 ;-)

Thanks.