From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=33717 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Oq7cI-0001K1-BD
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 12:53:56 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1Oq7PH-0006yE-98
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 12:40:28 -0400
Received: from mail-qw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.216.45]:40886)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1Oq7PG-0006y3-Vq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 12:40:27 -0400
Received: by qwh5 with SMTP id 5so5264498qwh.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 09:40:26 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4C7BDEF7.4070601@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 18:40:23 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1283183960-28404-1-git-send-email-Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>	<1283183960-28404-6-git-send-email-Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
	<4C7BD96E.3010500@codemonkey.ws>
In-Reply-To: <4C7BD96E.3010500@codemonkey.ws>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 05/14] Remove unused argument for
	check_for_block_signature()
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.nongnu.org/archive/html/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: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 08/30/2010 06:16 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> This is why this type of warning sucks.  Passing BlockDriverState is a
> matter of readability because these are roughly methods.  Just because
> 'this' isn't used right now, doesn't mean that it should not be a method.

On the contrary, to me this is acceptable (or even "a good thing") 
because a patch introducing the first use of a so-far-unused argument 
deserves a more careful review.  In fact, if we were using C++, 
check_for_block_signature should have been static.

The cases where the "this" argument is unused in a method should stand 
out as possible bugs, as is the case with the parse errors in the JSON 
parser (which _is_ a bug, as the caller cannot intercept error messages 
right now).  check_for_block_signature is not one of these.

Paolo