Re: [Libguestfs] [libnbd PATCH v4 01/11] rust: create basic Rust bindings
On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 03:20:04PM +0000, Tage Johansson wrote:
On 8/2/2023 5:42 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>Here we're using markdown, I guess, but ocamldoc comments prefer to
>use [ ... ] instead of ` ... ` (although we don't use ocamldoc really).
But should [ ... ] (brackets) be used even for pseudo code? When I
write `impl Handle {` I am just writing some pseudo Rust code which
would make no sense for ocamldoc to interpret. So my strategy has
been to use `...` (backticks) for pseudo code and [...] (brackets)
for actual OCaml items.
With the proviso that we don't in fact use ocamldoc, there is an
ocamldoc markup for verbatim blocks:
{v
v}
but it's probably a bit too heavyweight to use in general comments.
I would just stick to whatever other parts of the code use and be
consistent with them.
>>+version = "0.1.0"
>If you wanted to (and it may or may not be a good idea) you could
>include the actual version of libnbd here. You'd need to move
>rust/Cargo.toml to rust/Cargo.toml.in and add an autoconf
>AC_CONFIG_FILES directive to near the end of configure.in.
I am not sure about this. I think most "wrapper crates" don't follow
the exact same versioning as the library they are binding to. It
would make it less flexible to make breaking changes to the Rust
bindings alone without bumping Libnbd's version.
Sure, nbdkit rust bindings also use their own versioning scheme.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
nbdkit - Flexible, fast NBD server with plugins
https://gitlab.com/nbdkit/nbdkit