On 08/17/2018 11:48 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 09:33:33AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: >> While adding the object_initialize_child() function, Paolo suggested >> to rename the similar object_new_with_props() function accordingly: >> >> http://marc.info/?i=e034610d-9a1d-a8a5-ee92-b2e3f0ba2...@redhat.com >> >> This way it is more obvious that this function creates a new object >> as a child of another object. > > I'd expect 'object_new_with_child' to be the same as 'object_new', > but with only 'parent' & 'id' args added, which isn't the case here. > > If we want the full & consistent design then we should have > > object_new(typename) > object_new_with_child(typename, parent, id) > object_new_props(typename, ...) > object_new_propv(typename, va_arg props) > object_new_with_child_props(typename, parent, id, ...) > object_new_with_child_propv(typename, parent, id, va_arg props)
"new_with_child" sounds wrong, too, since the parent is not created here, but the child. Anyway, I guess the naming of these functions is too much subject to bikeshedding, so never mind, let's keep it as it currently is. Thomas
