* Greg Kurz (gr...@kaod.org) wrote: > On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 19:34:58 +0100 > "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilb...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > * Peter Maydell (peter.mayd...@linaro.org) wrote: > > > On 22 June 2017 at 19:08, Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On 22.06.2017 19:50, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > > >> Could do; I'm just not finding tiny header files with one or > > > >> two entries each that useful. > > > > > > Well, it means that the bulk of code that doesn't care about the > > > types doesn't get its compilation fractionally slowed by having > > > to parse the typedef anyway. In general I think we're drifting > > > towards "have each .c file get fewer things automatically" rather > > > than otherwise (eg more finely focused files rather than stuffing > > > everything into qemu-common.h). > > > > At the cost of things getting fractionally slower by including lots > > more tiny headers. > > > > I generally agree in the case where there's a useful chunk, > > but when it's down to one or two definitions I don't see the point. > > > > > > Do we really need these function typedefs at all? IMHO it's quite ugly > > > > to hide such things in a typedef unless it is really necessary (and in > > > > this case, it does not seem to be really necessary since it is only used > > > > in a few places). So what about simply removing the typedefs in this > > > > case? > > > > > > I find function typedefs much more readable than having the > > > function-types inline in function arguments and the like. > > > > > > This is all fairly rapidly heading into bikeshed territory > > > though -- in the final analysis I don't think it matters > > > much what we do. > > > > Agreed. > > > > Last question for my own comprehension. > > I can't think of a case where we would do something like: > > some_vmsd->load_state_old = some_se->ops->load_state; > > Does it make sense for VMStateDescription::load_state_old and > SaveVMHandlers::load_state > to be of the same type ?
(I think this is what we discussed on irc) There's only a few _old's and they're the same interface as the non-_old's, the only difference is the range of version_id's they're prepared to take. Dave > > Dave > > > > > thanks > > > -- PMM > > -- > > Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK > -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
