On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 14:45:13 -0500 Anthony Liguori <aligu...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 03/14/2011 02:37 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote: > > > > qerror_abort() only exists for debugging purposes. I won't say its perfect, > > but it's better than nothing and has already saved some time when writing > > new errors. > > > > I'm fine dropping it as long as there's a better replacement, which is > > not the case here. There's even a hunk that replaces qerror_abort() for > > a plain abort(). > > Yes, that's the replacement. It's not a good one: it makes the current code a bit worse and we don't know how and when the error classes are going to be replaced. Maybe a better merge plan would be to work on errors first. Completely drop qerror according to qapi needs, and then put the rest of the stuff on top.
