[Libguestfs] [libnbd PATCH v2 4/8] python: Reformat generated methods.c in a few places

[Eric Blake]

On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 09:00:08AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 09:08:29PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote:
> > +  pr ":nbd_%s\",\n" name;
> 
> You could put this pr (but without the \n) ...
> 
> > +  pr "                         ";
> > +  pr_wrap ',' (fun () ->
> 
> ... inside pr_wrap here, and it would mean you wouldn't need to print
> spaces to indent (because pr_wrap should do it for you).

Will do. It rearranges a few more lines of generated code (now the
&py_h argument can sometimes be a line earlier), but is still legible.

> 
> It all looks sensible and equivalent to the old code, and the output
> is cleaner too, so:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones at redhat.com>
>

I get when we have more than one statement to bundle how the OCaml
(fun () -> ... ) construct makes sense, but do we need that for this hunk?

> @@ -284,7 +285,10 @@ let
>  (* Generate the Python binding. *)
>  let print_python_binding name { args; optargs; ret; may_set_error } =
>    pr "PyObject *\n";
> -  pr "nbd_internal_py_%s (PyObject *self, PyObject *args)\n" name;
> +  pr "nbd_internal_py_%s (" name;
> +  pr_wrap ',' (fun () ->
> +      pr "PyObject *self, PyObject *args");
> +  pr ")\n";
>    pr "{\n";
>    pr "  PyObject *py_h;\n";
>    pr "  struct nbd_handle *h;\n";

or is there a shorter way to write that one?

-- 
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org