Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 17/21] qapi: Drop unused non-strict qobject input visitor

[Eric Blake]

On 02/24/2017 09:02 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>> On 23/02/2017 22:45, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>> The split between tests/test-qobject-input-visitor.c and
>>> tests/test-qobject-input-strict.c now makes less sense than ever.  The
>>> next commit will take care of that.
>>
>> I'm actually adding a use for non-strict visitors (and one that makes
>> sense IMHO, with comments, testcases and all that :)).  See
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/address@hidden/msg432069.html.
> 
> I replied.

Hmm. Right now, we implement strict checking by populating a hash table
in parallel to the QObject being visited, then checking if it gets
emptied.  I wonder if it would be any simpler to clone the QObject and
then remove keys, rather than tracking a separate hash table.  In fact,
you could then turn strict checking into an after-the-fact item:
creating the visitor passes in a QObject, then after the visit you check
whether the QObject has been emptied.  But that's not something that has
to be solved for 2.9.

> 
>> For what it's worth, however, I believe that even non-strict visits
>> should detect unvisited list tails.
> 
> Bit of an asymmetry.  Not sure it matters, because to not visit list
> tails, you have to put in some effort.
> 
> 

-- 
Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature