On 02/18/2016 11:56 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Better, but the sentence is long enough to confuse even a German. What
> about:
lol
>
> The corresponding spot in qapi-visit.c calls visit_type_FOO(), which
> first calls visit_start_struct() to allocate or deallocate the member
>
Eric Blake writes:
> On 02/18/2016 09:43 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Eric Blake writes:
>>
>>> There's no reason to do two malloc's for an alternate type visiting
>>> a QAPI struct; let's just inline the struct directly as the C union
>>> branch of the struct.
>>>
>>>
>>> meanwhile, in qapi
On 02/18/2016 09:43 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Eric Blake writes:
>
>> There's no reason to do two malloc's for an alternate type visiting
>> a QAPI struct; let's just inline the struct directly as the C union
>> branch of the struct.
>>
>>
>> meanwhile, in qapi-visit.h, we trade the previous
Eric Blake writes:
> There's no reason to do two malloc's for an alternate type visiting
> a QAPI struct; let's just inline the struct directly as the C union
> branch of the struct.
>
> Surprisingly, no clients were actually using the struct member prior
> to this patch outside of the testsuite;
There's no reason to do two malloc's for an alternate type visiting
a QAPI struct; let's just inline the struct directly as the C union
branch of the struct.
Surprisingly, no clients were actually using the struct member prior
to this patch outside of the testsuite; an earlier patch in the series
