On 27/05/20 17:05, Peter Maydell wrote: > I disagree with these. We're in a realize function, the API > says "on errors, report them via the Error* you got passed", > so we should do that, not blow up. &error_abort only makes > sense if (a) we have no better way to report errors than > to abort (which isn't the case here) or (b) if we can guarantee > that in fact the thing we're doing won't ever fail > (which we can't here without knowing more about the internal > implementation details of the MOS6522 device than we > really ought to).
Note however that before replacing &error_abort with error propagation you need to make sure that you are "un-realizing" yourself properly. So it may be better to have inferior (but clearly visible) error propagation behavior, than untested (and perhaps untestable) buggy code that looks great on the surface. Paolo
