Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 02/10] qom: Introduce ObjectPropertyIterator struct for iteration

["Andreas Färber" <afaerber@suse.de>]

Am 19.11.2015 um 10:20 schrieb Markus Armbruster:
> Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de> writes:
> 
>> From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>
>>
>> Some users of QOM need to be able to iterate over properties
>> defined against an object instance. Currently they are just
>> directly using the QTAIL macros against the object properties
>> data structure.
>>
>> This is bad because it exposes them to changes in the data
>> structure used to store properties, as well as changes in
>> functionality such as ability to register properties against
>> the class.
>>
>> This provides an ObjectPropertyIterator struct which will
>> insulate the callers from the particular data structure
>> used to store properties. It can be used thus
>>
>>   ObjectProperty *prop;
>>   ObjectPropertyIterator *iter;
>>
>>   iter = object_property_iter_init(obj);
>>   while ((prop = object_property_iter_next(iter))) {
>>       ... do something with prop ...
>>   }
>>   object_property_iter_free(iter);
> 
> I see my review hasn't been addressed,

Well, it has, I double-checked that the missing "Iterator" above was
already on my branch, therefore my IRC comment pointing you to qom-next.

> probably because it came late.

Other than that you only seemed to discuss design alternatives, for
which neither you nor Daniel provided any actual patch I could've
applied. While I regularly do style fixups myself, and with the series
missing -rc0 also functional fixes, posting a diff for review/record, I
do not see redesigning a 6-patch series as something I can silently do
last-minute without full respin, for which -rc1 did not leave time.

There was a v3 with iterators, and Pavel pinged v4 twice, I did once
too, and the last delay after getting the series to work was only due to
me inserting Daniel's test case (legit hardfreeze material), so ...

> Would you accept a follow-up patch to bring the iterator into line with
> existing ones?

... yes, from my perspective any such cleanups can be done post-2.5.

Please note that both patch 6/7 (included) and 7/7 (not in this pull)
enhance the iterator, so follow-up patches should be based on qom-next
please.

Thanks,
Andreas

-- 
SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton; HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)