qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 04/28] qom: add the base Object class (v2)


From: Anthony Liguori
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 04/28] qom: add the base Object class (v2)
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:37:56 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110922 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.15

On 01/25/2012 03:30 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
Am 24.01.2012 20:32, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
This class provides the main building block for QEMU Object Model and is
extensively documented in the header file.  It is largely inspired by GObject.

Signed-off-by: Anthony Liguori<address@hidden>
---
v1 ->  v2
  - remove printf() in type registration
  - fix typo in comment (Paolo)
  - make Interface private
  - move object into a new directory and move header into include/qemu/

Some of us had expressed concerns over introducing include/. Any
particular reason you're doing it still?

Because it's a great idea and I thought everyone loved it?

Can you point me to the concerns raised, I'll go back and look. I didn't think it was contentious...

To summarize my rationale for it:

1) It avoids all of the non-sense with conflicting system headers (because we -Iinclude and the headers live in include/qemu)

2) It establishes what are public functions for use in other parts of qemu vs. private headers (which we currently use based on ad-hoc naming schemes like block_int.h).

3) I think the kernel serves as an existence proof that this method to manage headers works really well in practice.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori


Andreas





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]