From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35068) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bpkt8-0004O0-2h for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 19:37:15 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bpkt4-0006Df-P3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 19:37:14 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:46413) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bpkt3-0006CV-VT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 19:37:10 -0400 Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 09:36:39 +1000 From: David Gibson Message-ID: <20160929233639.GK30519@umbus.fritz.box> References: <1475108205-6043-1-git-send-email-david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> <20160929081416.GD5312@redhat.com> <8b3cbb6a-1e95-20e8-e34e-d25f790855ff@suse.de> <20160929102122.GL5312@redhat.com> <2f804b68-2438-b877-e4c3-be48e6d12000@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="gBYU9MM4gf8jKg2V" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2f804b68-2438-b877-e4c3-be48e6d12000@suse.de> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC 0/4] QOM class properties - do we need them? List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4rber?= Cc: "Daniel P. Berrange" , peter.maydell@linaro.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, armbru@redhat.com, lcapitulino@redhat.com --gBYU9MM4gf8jKg2V Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 12:23:41PM +0200, Andreas F=E4rber wrote: > Am 29.09.2016 um 12:21 schrieb Daniel P. Berrange: > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 12:12:32PM +0200, Andreas F=E4rber wrote: > >> Am 29.09.2016 um 10:14 schrieb Daniel P. Berrange: > >>> Practically all instances properties should become class properties > >>> as its going to save wasting memory once most are converted. > >> > >> Not all, but most. child<> properties were the reason to have properti= es > >> on the instance. > >=20 > > That's why I said "Practically all", instead of just "all" :-) >=20 > To me as non-native speaker "practically" is the opposite of > "theoretically". :) Heh, more English corner cases. "Theoretically" and "in theory" mean the same thing, but "practically" and "in practice" don't. Or.. they do in theory, but not in practice :p. For bonus confusion, saying "practically speaking" would, in this context, mean what you expected, but "practically" on its own doesn't - it means basically the same as "almost" or "nearly". --=20 David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson --gBYU9MM4gf8jKg2V Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJX7aWHAAoJEGw4ysog2bOSXrkP/0vymZvaXQMMGSm1sY/H+nId KMGoK2/wKZefY59YL4FZ77NsYBpswP4CoWXf2acVPKTzo9RbiW6/aKhih6U9vzkJ wpAgX44cXDnha78kjT/OMx4oQthqA26E5mQXcDU28bikPyGnof7tcVCTMECeZs3H RxcseZMIxQKYRRLWO18Ll++o8hv0BFrSG6429sSSKZxHkSbcfeuRm/B2D/Nciv2I 9v10chKbY51nFhfhW+r3QvJDiSre0YJQkBw1vcIdOuY0gGzViSAX0WcV/r5m0HEc UW5TkDgScZkx/j2pSIUqck80gOVF0vo0Ddih0guZGJmJL8fi0zeHH9pSYSf9VceC alugA0qEcvboNG7zfgxc8YTYzAmZogS6YpAKR/DBqzh8af/1WRXU4atT1eXU0CeY +hCg2YsPbktSzapHxaE3lhZGCmU3zdQNG5pPgu1LpaAEmM4DOoSaShqv0lK4bBuU ck5Q0jvS7x+62VIaKi+G2PjE7YP/QAONjDdaD7eDBYwivIS7uJDA1FLLRDVjaEPJ Se1kAoIFiM6nIYu2MJ3erqWZaxSSVqj6CH3Wxd50gCXoXwhLR5DfTUT4nhmhN2hn OhJLHur8eDohptj7CVD8+b27M+VOmuFJkwuq9tgAdW92x+MoZVi+VRfCYPzya1eh 0lvCtY7R2mNyY8IZQs57 =9Z7J -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --gBYU9MM4gf8jKg2V--