From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:56302)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1SF3Rl-0004PZ-04
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Apr 2012 09:06:59 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1SF3Rc-0000aS-Ab
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Apr 2012 09:06:51 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:53043)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1SF3Rc-0000YZ-3R
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Apr 2012 09:06:44 -0400
Message-ID: <4F7AF5DA.5030705@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2012 15:06:34 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1333451753-3550-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
	<1333451753-3550-5-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
	<4F7AED5F.6000200@suse.de>
In-Reply-To: <4F7AED5F.6000200@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 04/25] qom: make Object a type
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: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>
Cc: aliguori@us.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Il 03/04/2012 14:30, Andreas F=E4rber ha scritto:
>> > Right now the base Object class has a special NULL type.  Change thi=
s so
>> > that we will be able to add class_init and class_base_init callbacks.
>> > To do this, remove some special casing of ObjectClass that is not re=
ally
>> > necessary.
> While the patch itself looks good, we should be aware that this changes
> semantics: Before this patch, lack of .parent is identical to .parent =3D
> TYPE_OBJECT; with this patch that would become another base class.
> Should be mentioned in the commit message and all TypeInfos need to be
> reviewed. I don't think accidentally growing base classes is a good
> idea. Maybe whitelist valid base classes in type_register_static() and
> abort otherwise? Then at least we'd catch it by just running the
> executables.
>=20

Good idea.

Paolo