qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 02/17] qidl: add qc definitions


From: Kevin Wolf
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 02/17] qidl: add qc definitions
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 13:42:42 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1

Am 05.06.2012 13:26, schrieb Jan Kiszka:
> On 2012-06-05 13:12, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> On 06/05/2012 06:35 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> On 2012-06-05 03:00, Michael Roth wrote:
>>>> Define away the annotations so we can still compile.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Roth<address@hidden>
>>>> ---
>>>>   qapi/qc.h |   11 +++++++++++
>>>>   1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>>   create mode 100644 qapi/qc.h
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/qapi/qc.h b/qapi/qc.h
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 0000000..3b3a8b9
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/qapi/qc.h
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
>>>> +#ifndef QC_H
>>>> +#define QC_H
>>>> +
>>>> +#define qc_declaration
>>>> +#define _immutable
>>>> +#define _derived
>>>> +#define _broken
>>>> +#define _version(x)
>>>> +#define _size_is(x)
>>>> +
>>>> +#endif
>>>
>>> These tags require a different prefix than the reserved '_'.
>>
>> The rationale is that QIDL is part of the "compiler/library implementation" 
>> that 
>> this namespace is reserved for.
> 
> It's a QEMU-internal thing, and we want to be portable. Not sure if it's
> worth to risk collisions in some distant corner.

I agree, this isn't really convincing. If QIDL was part of the system
environment, it wouldn't be in the qemu source tree. After all these
rules aren't there just for fun but in order to avoid naming conflicts,
and conflicts between qemu and qemu are much less likely than between
some exotic libc and qemu.

Kevin



reply via email to

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