On 04/25/11 14:27, Ian Molton wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-04-22 at 13:51 +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> Hiding things you miss when reading the code, it's a classic for
>> people to do if(foo) bleh(); on the same line, and whoever reads
>> the code will expect the action on the next line, especially if f
On Fri, 2011-04-22 at 13:51 +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> > What kind of coding error does splitting this out aim to prevent?
> > missing break; / return; statements? Because I dont see how it
> achieves
> > that...
>
> Hiding things you miss when reading the code, it's a classic for
> people
> to
On 04/22/11 11:23, Ian Molton wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 08:21 -0500, Michael Roth wrote:
+switch (level& G_LOG_LEVEL_MASK) {
+case G_LOG_LEVEL_ERROR: return "error";
+case G_LOG_LEVEL_CRITICAL: return "critical";
+case G_LOG_LEVEL_WARNING:
On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 08:21 -0500, Michael Roth wrote:
> >> +switch (level& G_LOG_LEVEL_MASK) {
> >> +case G_LOG_LEVEL_ERROR: return "error";
> >> +case G_LOG_LEVEL_CRITICAL: return "critical";
> >> +case G_LOG_LEVEL_WARNING: return "warning";
> >> +case
On 04/21/2011 03:50 AM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
On 04/18/11 17:02, Michael Roth wrote:
+static const char *ga_log_level_str(GLogLevelFlags level)
+{
+switch (level& G_LOG_LEVEL_MASK) {
+case G_LOG_LEVEL_ERROR: return "error";
+case G_LOG_LEVEL_CRITICAL: return "critical";
+
On 04/18/11 17:02, Michael Roth wrote:
> +static const char *ga_log_level_str(GLogLevelFlags level)
> +{
> +switch (level & G_LOG_LEVEL_MASK) {
> +case G_LOG_LEVEL_ERROR: return "error";
> +case G_LOG_LEVEL_CRITICAL: return "critical";
> +case G_LOG_LEVEL_WARNING:
This is the actual guest daemon, it listens for requests over a
virtio-serial/isa-serial/unix socket channel and routes them through
to dispatch routines, and writes the results back to the channel in
a manner similar to QMP.
A shorthand invocation:
qemu-ga -d
Is equivalent to:
qemu-ga -c v
