On 06/06/2012 11:45 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> Ok. But then the backend pointer is not 'const Backend * const', it's >> 'Backend * const' (if we don't allow retargeting). So we can't say it's >> _immutable (and it isn't). It's _host. > > 'Backend * const' is immutable > > That is, the *pointer* is immutable. What it points to is not.
So, is it reasonable to say uint32_t * _immutable irrp; // Interrupt Request Register and allocate it on the heap during initialization? > > If you want to '#define _host _immutable' as a way to improve > readability, I'm not against that. But from a conceptional perspective, > we don't migrate it because nothing the guest does changes it. It's > immutable from the guests PoV. It's not only immutable from the guest point of view, it's unreadable as well. That's what _host means -- it doesn't exist as far as the guest is concerned. IMO that's different than immutable. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
