Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> writes: > Am 24.05.2012 16:08, schrieb Markus Armbruster: >> Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> writes: >> >>> Am 24.05.2012 13:43, schrieb Markus Armbruster: >>>> Beware: second patch is the product of voodoo-coding. >>> >>> Hm, I don't like the voodoo. ;) I would rather expose a proper C API >>> like object_try_new(const char *, Error **) than opening up the TypeImpl >>> internals to the public and hand-coding it everywhere. >> >> How does returning a TypeImpl * open up TypeImpl any more than >> type_register() already does? > > type_register[_static]() operates on TypeInfo, not TypeImpl. > > I consider TypeImpl an implementation detail of qom/object.c, but maybe > I'm mistaken.
They return TypeImpl *, just like type_get_by_name(). [...]
