From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MjBFP-000154-F2
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Sep 2009 08:17:03 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MjBFK-0000yF-Ip
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Sep 2009 08:17:02 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=42050 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MjBFK-0000xk-6Y
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Sep 2009 08:16:58 -0400
Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:28322)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <sdbrady@ntlworld.com>)
	id 1MjB3t-00055H-Pb
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Sep 2009 08:05:09 -0400
Received: from mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.47])
	by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <sdbrady@ntlworld.com>) id 1MjB3e-0007Iu-2L
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Sep 2009 08:04:55 -0400
Received: from aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35])
	by mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com
	(InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id
	<20090903120429.XMBZ6742.mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com>
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 3 Sep 2009 13:04:29 +0100
Received: from miranda.arrow ([213.107.24.213])
	by aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com
	(InterMail vG.2.02.00.01 201-2161-120-102-20060912) with ESMTP id
	<20090903120429.YGDB2093.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@miranda.arrow>
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 3 Sep 2009 13:04:29 +0100
Received: from sdb by miranda.arrow with local (Exim 4.63)
	(envelope-from <sdbrady@ntlworld.com>) id 1MjB4S-0007ik-Ge
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:05:44 +0100
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 13:05:44 +0100
From: Stuart Brady <sdbrady@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: Coding style,
	C++ compatible code (was Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 02/22] eepro100:
	cast a void * makes no sense)
Message-ID: <20090903120544.GA29558@miranda.arrow>
References: <cover.1251111439.git.quintela@redhat.com>
	<51486eb6860d1680c1bce45e310dcd3aae096f43.1251111439.git.quintela@redhat.com>
	<4A928DF0.9000106@weilnetz.de> <87tyzxnwvb.fsf@pike.pond.sub.org>
	<4A953E20.8080806@mail.berlios.de>
	<yw1x63camwk1.fsf@unicorn.mansr.com>
	<20090826155824.GA3785@1und1.de> <4A955E17.60605@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4A955E17.60605@redhat.com>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 07:08:55PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Or better, NEW() and NEW_ARRAY().

ISTR this being discussed before, but there was some disagreement
regarding whether it is preferable to have:

   QEMU_NEW(ptr);

or:

   ptr = QEMU_NEW(type);

If the type is incorrect, the latter form would still at least yield a
warning (and now therefore a build failure).  It seems slightly more 
readable to me, so that's the form that I would have preferred...

Is there any reason that this wouldn't be accepted, or should I start
submitting patches?

Cheers,
-- 
Stuart Brady