I agree with everything here. It would be nice to make the register accessors
work similarly, but I don't remember people liking that idea.
Gabe
Quoting nathan binkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> So, Packet and Request have lots of functions called getFoo and
> setFoo. That sort of style has always annoyed me because it requires
> a lot of extra typing and space. e.g.
>
> /// Accessor function for the destination index of the packet.
> short getDest() const { assert(destValid); return dest; }
> /// Accessor function to set the destination index of the packet.
> void setDest(short _dest) { dest = _dest; destValid = true; }
>
> Would there be major objections to changing this to:
>
> /// Accessor function for the destination index of the packet.
> short dest() const { assert(destValid); return _dest; }
> /// Accessor function to set the destination index of the packet.
> void dest(short d) { _dest = d; destValid = true; }
>
> You can tell if it is a get or a set by how it is called. If people
> hate this, we could keep the setDest() version and rename getDest to
> dest().
>
> I can see one major objection to this change being the impact that it
> could have on people porting their own code forward to newer versions
> of M5 after this change. That said, if we're going to be doing any
> major changes to the memory system, now is the time to make this sort
> of change.
>
> Nate
> _______________________________________________
> m5-dev mailing list
> m5-dev@m5sim.org
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
>
_______________________________________________
m5-dev mailing list
m5-dev@m5sim.org
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
