On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Gabe Black <[email protected]> wrote:
> Are you ok with this original change and renaming files later? I'm fine with that. > What do > you think of the new name? > It looks to me like fault.hh is basically just forward declarations while faults.hh has the actual definitions, right? Do we have any other pairs of files that are split this way? Usually we don't bother having a file with just forward declarations since you can just type "class Foo;" directly, but the RefCountingPtr typedefs and (soon) the NoFault declaration make this a case where there is value. I'd be in favor of file names that actually try to reflect that distinction, like fault_decls.hh and fault_defs.hh. I totally agree with Nate that the current scheme is not really meaningful at all and thus should be changed. Steve
_______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
