From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:37778)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1Sqs9P-0000EA-En
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 16:44:16 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1Sqs9O-00022B-Gh
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 16:44:15 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:54275)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1Sqs9O-000221-91
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 16:44:14 -0400
Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
	(int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q6GKiCOk028357
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK)
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 16:44:13 -0400
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 17:44:48 -0300
From: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20120716174448.605127cd@doriath.home>
In-Reply-To: <50047A1E.8030304@redhat.com>
References: <1339575768-2557-1-git-send-email-lersek@redhat.com>
	<1339575768-2557-2-git-send-email-lersek@redhat.com>
	<20120713133852.3a446672@doriath.home>
	<50005B3D.2070009@redhat.com> <500072D3.2060901@redhat.com>
	<20120716141200.5bbed537@doriath.home>
	<50047A1E.8030304@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 01/17] qapi: fix error propagation
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: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 22:31:26 +0200
Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 07/16/12 19:12, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > On Fri, 13 Jul 2012 21:11:15 +0200
> > Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > 
> >> I think doing it for error_set was just for symmetry and to avoid
> >> introducing excessive complexity.
> > 
> > We already check if the error is set in several places, and I don't think
> > it will add much complexity. I still think that an assert() is better.
> 
> If that means that the generated traversal code takes responsibility to
> call any visitor callback with a fresh error receptacle, IOW I can go
> ahead and just use error_set() in OptsVisitor and any firing assert will
> be blamed on the generator: fine :)

If that means it's finding bugs then that's great. On the other hand, if it
shows only false positives and we end up having to re-work the code just to
avoid that, then I'd agree on not having an assert().