From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH kvm-unit-tests 2/4] Introduce a C++ wrapper for the kvm
 APIs
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 19:35:38 +0200
Message-ID: <4CED4CEA.7080000@redhat.com>
References: <1290595933-13122-1-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com> <1290595933-13122-3-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com> <50DD1E97-0ECD-41E6-B6F8-1D78AA4A4876@suse.de> <4CED2416.1040102@codemonkey.ws> <20101124154006.GE15111@redhat.com> <4CED344B.3030000@codemonkey.ws> <4CED3FE6.50900@redhat.com> <4CED41A0.8060003@redhat.com> <4CED4276.9090103@redhat.com> <4CED445E.30105@redhat.com> <4CED4629.2060804@redhat.com> <4CED4738.2020406@redhat.com> <4CED488D.40806@redhat.com> <4CED4B0E.3030805@codemonkey.ws>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:15782 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1754541Ab0KXRfq (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 24 Nov 2010 12:35:46 -0500
In-Reply-To: <4CED4B0E.3030805@codemonkey.ws>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On 11/24/2010 07:27 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
> The alternative in C is:
>
> struct file_operations {
>    void (*release)(void);
>    void (*read)(...);
>    void (*write)(...);
> };
>
> struct file {
>   struct file_operations *ops;
> };
>
> If I do:
>
> static file_operations posix_file_ops = {
>   .read = posix_file_read,
>   .write = posix_file_write,
> };
>
> struct posix_file {
>   struct file parent;
>   int fd;
> };
>
> void posix_file_init(struct posix_file *obj)
> {
>     obj->parent.ops = posix_file_ops;
>     obj->fd = ...;
> };
>
> The compiler won't generate an error.  Only upon a call to 
> file_release() will a null pointer dereference happens whereas in C++, 
> because this paradigm is structured in the language, the compiler can 
> help assist you.

You forgot to mention:

   static void posix_file_read(struct file *_file, ...)
   {
        struct posix_file *file = container_of(_file, struct posix_file, 
parent);

        ...
   }

Even more boilerplate and potential for error.  But I think the worst 
thing about this is that it makes it hard to do the right thing, so 
people hack quick and dirty workarounds.  C++ makes this pattern trivial 
(if : laden), so people are encouraged to use it.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function