qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qom: helper macro for adding read-only properti


From: Peter Maydell
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qom: helper macro for adding read-only properties
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2013 18:54:35 +0100

On 15 September 2013 18:23, Michael S. Tsirkin <address@hidden> wrote:
> +/* Add a property that is an integer constant. */
> +#define OBJECT_ADD_PROP_CONST(obj, name, value)                      \
> +    do {                                                                    \
> +        void OBJECT_ADD_PROP_GET(Object *OBJECT_ADD_PROP_OBJ,               \
> +                                 struct Visitor *OBJECT_ADD_PROP_VISITOR,   \
> +                                 void *OBJECT_ADD_PROP_OPAQUE,              \
> +                                 const char *OBJECT_ADD_PROP_NAME,          \
> +                                 struct Error **OBJECT_ADD_PROP_VALUE_ERR)  \
> +        {                                                                   \
> +            int64_t OBJECT_ADD_PROP_VALUE = value;                          \
> +                                                                            \
> +            visit_type_int64(OBJECT_ADD_PROP_VISITOR,                       \
> +                             &OBJECT_ADD_PROP_VALUE,                        \
> +                             OBJECT_ADD_PROP_NAME,                          \
> +                             OBJECT_ADD_PROP_VALUE_ERR);                    \
> +        }                                                                   \
> +        object_property_add(obj, name, "int", OBJECT_ADD_PROP_GET,          \
> +                            NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL);                        \
> +    } while (0)

This won't compile in clang, because it doesn't support nested
functions. Clang is our primary compiler for MacOS hosts and
is useful for various testing scenarios too (like its "integer sanitizing"
compile options) so I'd rather we didn't break it...

thanks
-- PMM



reply via email to

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