Am 17.06.2014 17:07, schrieb Paolo Bonzini: > Il 17/06/2014 16:18, Andreas Färber ha scritto: >>> +void object_property_add_full(Object *obj, const char *name, const >>> char *type, >>> + ObjectPropertyAccessor *get, >>> + ObjectPropertyAccessor *set, >>> + ObjectPropertyResolve *resolve, >>> + ObjectPropertyRelease *release, >>> + void *opaque, Error **errp); >> >> I'm a bit concerned about the duplication going on here, e.g. of the >> forbidden characters. I think we should either just add the new argument >> to object_property_add() and add NULL arguments at old call sites as >> done before, or we should (to avoid future _really_full, >> _really_really_full versions) return the resulting ObjectProperty * for >> modification by the caller (in this case: ->resolve = foo). > > The reason I went with "_full" is that the new argument is really needed > only in a minority of cases. There are ~50 occurrences right now, and I > expect only a handful of them to need a ->resolve callback (and so far > all of them would be in qom/object.c). > > There are many examples in glib's GSource (g_timeout_add_full, > g_main_context_invoke_full, etc.) or elsewhere in glib > (g_format_size_full). > > Since we do not have an ABI to follow, we could add arguments to the > _full routine while keeping the shorthand version as is. > > I can change the 50 occurrences if you want though.
So what about my alternative suggestion of changing _add's void -> ObjectProperty*? That would limit future updating to the struct itself while still avoiding to touch the 50. Andreas -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg
