From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:43086)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>) id 1RqkpB-0000jt-Qr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 07:22:41 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>) id 1RqkpA-0003HN-Sg
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 07:22:37 -0500
Message-ID: <4F229704.9020003@siemens.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 13:22:28 +0100
From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1327593288-22521-1-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de>
	<8739b1pceg.fsf@elfo.elfo>
In-Reply-To: <8739b1pceg.fsf@elfo.elfo>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v8] qdev: Add support for property type bool
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: "quintela@redhat.com" <quintela@redhat.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>, Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>, "qemu-trivial@nongnu.org" <qemu-trivial@nongnu.org>, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Vasilis Liaskovitis <vasilis.liaskovitis@profitbricks.com>, =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcw==?= =?UTF-8?B?IEbDpHJiZXI=?= <andreas.faerber@web.de>, Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= <afaerber@suse.de>

On 2012-01-27 13:17, Juan Quintela wrote:
>> +{
>> +    bool *ptr = qdev_get_prop_ptr(dev, prop);
>> +    if (strcmp(str, "true") == 0 || strcmp(str, "yes") == 0) {
>> +        *ptr = true;
>> +    } else if (strcmp(str, "false") == 0 || strcmp(str, "no") == 0) {
>> +        *ptr = false;
>> +    } else {
>> +        return -EINVAL;
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int parse_bool_switch(DeviceState *dev, Property *prop,
>> +                             const char *str)
>> +{
>> +    bool *ptr = qdev_get_prop_ptr(dev, prop);
>> +    if (strcmp(str, "on") == 0) {
>> +        *ptr = true;
>> +    } else if (strcmp(str, "off") == 0) {
>> +        *ptr = false;
>> +    } else {
>> +        return -EINVAL;
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    return 0;
>> +}
> 
> As I am joining late to this discussion, I am not going to point it very
> strong.  But I think that it is an easy to have a single bool type that
> accept yes/on/true and no/off/false.  Didn't really see a strong
> advantage with the split.

Accepting all this on input is a non-issue, but true/false as output is
suboptimal for quite a few existing and future switches.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux