On 07/29/2015 02:00 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>>> We don't have any code that demonstrates this, but probably should. I >>>> ran into it while working up my POC of what it would take to unbox >>>> inherited structs >>>> (http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/353204) >>> >>> Is this broken in master, or do my patches break it? >>> >>> Got a reproducer? >> >> Turns out I'm mistaken; we got lucky. The call to >> generate_visit_struct_fields() creates a function for 'name' (aka the >> union name), and not for 'base' (aka the class name that owns the >> fields). So even if we have Base as a common struct between Child and >> Union, the code emitted for Child generates visit_Base_fields(), while >> the code emitted for Union generates visit_Union_fields(). >> >> So there is no reproducer, but _only_ as long as we reject unions as a >> base class for any other object. And there is redundancy: we could >> reuse visit_Base_fields() for the sake of the union, then avoid >> (re-)visiting the discriminator, and we would no longer need to emit >> visit_Union_fields(). But I can do that as part of the followup >> cleanups; since I don't see anything broken with your patch, we don't >> have to worry about it during this series. > > Good. Thank you!
And here's a followup patch that cleans it up: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/353204/focus=353728 -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
