From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58981) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SXYkm-0007YZ-OO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 May 2012 10:11:11 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SXYkg-00057w-5N for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 May 2012 10:11:00 -0400 Received: from mail-ob0-f173.google.com ([209.85.214.173]:45584) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SXYkf-00055c-Vw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 May 2012 10:10:54 -0400 Received: by obbwd20 with SMTP id wd20so15587459obb.4 for ; Thu, 24 May 2012 07:10:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4FBE4168.4000204@codemonkey.ws> Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 09:10:48 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1337859784-24097-1-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com> <4FBE2A59.3060701@suse.de> <4FBE324C.70407@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/2] QMP command qom-new List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= , Markus Armbruster On 05/24/2012 08:18 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 24 May 2012 14:06, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> There are very few places where errors can be handled gracefully. They are >> exceptions and can be treated as such. >> >> I think it's far better for the QOM infrastructure to assert when it detects >> something bad because 99% of the users of QOM do not even attempt to handle >> errors gracefully > > Last time I was trying to argue for keeping the "create, set properties, > realize" interface for devices/objects as simple as possible you wanted > it to have an error-return interface rather than asserting... You need to be more specific than that I'm afraid.. Regards, Anthony Liguori > > -- PMM