Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> writes: > On 09.07.2018 23:42, Peter Maydell wrote: >> On 9 July 2018 at 22:03, Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> wrote: [...] > Hmm, maybe we need a qtest that first executes "info qtree", then runs > 'device-list-properties' for all devices and finally checks "info qtree" > again ... since 'device-list-properties' should not change the qtree, > the output of the "info qtree" should be the same.
Lovely idea. > Currently this is not > the case :-/ Less than lovely, but I can't claim to be surprised. As Peter remarked elsewhere in this thread, QOM is underdocumented, and is too easy to misuse. On documentation: we sorely lack documentation tying everything together. GDK-Doc function comments alone can't cut it for something as complex as QOM. Even with adequate documentation, bad examples in the source will continue to multiply. We'll have to get rid of them.
