Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] New API for asynchronous monitor commands

[Avi Kivity]

On 01/24/2010 04:01 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > Instead of sending opaques everywhere (and having them correspond to 
> > different types in different cases), I would prefer it if the handle 
> > always accepted an AsyncCommandCompletion *.  That makes it easier to 
> > follow the code, since there are no opaques you have to guess the 
> > true type of.
>
>
> I agree with you in principle but the model of passing (function 
> pointer, opaque) is pervasive within QEMU.  I'd prefer consistency 
> here and if we want to switch to something more like a function 
> object, we do it globally.

At least some recent code has moved in this direction (together with 
container_of()), but I don't think there's a reason to press this issue now.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function