Am 25.01.2013 11:25, schrieb Paolo Bonzini: > Il 25/01/2013 10:21, Andreas Färber ha scritto: >>>> >>>> Ping. >> I believe I was still waiting for an explanation why this qbus_init() >> function must be exposed rather than one _new() and one _initialize() >> function... Not getting feedback on that, I was already considering >> sending you an alternative patch for the initial two. > > Because you cannot object_initialize the result of object_new. It would > overwrite the free callback and leak memory.
I never suggested that. > So you need three functions: _new() (which is usually called foo_create > for buses), _initialize() (which is usually foo_create_inplace), and a > third which I called _init(). My question still is, *why* do we need a third one? My suggestion is foo_bus_initialize() -> bus_initialize() -> object_initialize() and foo_bus_new() -> bus_new() -> object_new(). Code sharing can be done static-qbus_realize()-style (call that qbus_init if you like but don't expose this detail). Regards, Andreas -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg
