On 24 May 2012 15:35, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Ah, okay. So you're taking those comments a bit out of context.
>
> The right way to use object_new() is:
>
> Object *foo = object_new(TYPE_E1000);
>
> If you mistype TYPE_E1000, you should get a compile failure. There's
> basically no way that this
Andreas Färber writes:
> Am 24.05.2012 16:08, schrieb Markus Armbruster:
>> Andreas Färber 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
>>> l
On 05/24/2012 09:23 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 24 May 2012 15:10, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/24/2012 08:18 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
Last time I was trying to argue for keeping the "create, set properties,
realize" interface for devices/objects as simple as possible you wanted
it to have an
Am 24.05.2012 16:08, schrieb Markus Armbruster:
> Andreas Färber 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 *, E
On 24 May 2012 15:10, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 05/24/2012 08:18 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> Last time I was trying to argue for keeping the "create, set properties,
>> realize" interface for devices/objects as simple as possible you wanted
>> it to have an error-return interface rather than ass
On 05/24/2012 08:18 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 24 May 2012 14:06, Anthony Liguori wrote:
There are very few places where errors can be handled gracefully. They are
exceptions and can be treated as such.
I think it's far better for the QOM infrastructure to assert when it detects
something ba
Andreas Färber 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
On 24 May 2012 14:06, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> There are very few places where errors can be handled gracefully. They are
> exceptions and can be treated as such.
>
> I think it's far better for the QOM infrastructure to assert when it detects
> something bad because 99% of the users of QOM do no
On 05/24/2012 07:32 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
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
inte
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 everywher
Beware: second patch is the product of voodoo-coding.
Markus Armbruster (2):
qom: Give type_get_by_name() external linkage
qmp: New command qom-new
include/qemu/object.h |8
qapi-schema.json | 22 ++
qmp-commands.hx |5 +
qmp.c
11 matches
Mail list logo
