On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:21:46PM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 13:19:41 +0100, Daniel Berrange wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:03:53PM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 13:56:06 +0200, Pavel Hrdina wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 12:45:56PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 01:41:52PM +0200, Pavel Hrdina wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 09:02:36AM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 18:17:28 +0100, Daniel Berrange
wrote:
> > > > > > > Replace use of the gnulib base64 module with
glib's own base64 API family.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé
<berrange(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > ---
> >
> > [..]
> >
> > > > >
> > > > > Here I agree with Peter, for this series I would use VIR_FREE()
where
> > > > > it's possible and only for glib objects we can use
g_autoptr.
> > > > >
> > > > > But eventually I would like to switch to g_autofree and friends
in order
> > > > > to eliminate our specific helpers in favor of glib helpers.
> > > > >
> > > > > This also brings a question if we should keep our wrappers for
glib or
> > > > > use it directly. For example the string functions that we
have.
> > > >
> > > > Where any libvirt code just duplicates something that alrady exists,
then
> > > > I think there's no compelling reason to keep it, the best code is
code
> > > > that doesn't exist.
> > > >
> > > > I don't want todo too many big bang replacements though, so I
think best
> > > > to deprecate existing libvirt code and phase it out incrementally in
many
> > > > cases.
> >
> > I agree in case of the other infrastructure for automatic pointers as
> > that will require more changes.
> >
> > In this case I don't see why we shouldn't just replace all use of
> > VIR_AUTOFREE with g_autofree if the idea is to use g_autofree from now
> > on.
>
> Well that's 1500 uses, across 150 files, so quite a big bang conversion.
> It would need to be split up quite alot otherwise it will be a backport
> conflict magnet. Certainly we want to clean this at some point, its just
> a question of timing.
>
> My preference is to focus on things with functional benefit as the higher
> priority.
Then please stick with VIR_AUTOFREE for any code you plan to introduce.
That forces an even bigger switch over at a later date. An incremental
conversion is much less painful overall, even if there is a period when
there are two styles in use.
Regards,
Daniel
--
|:
https://berrange.com -o-
https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|:
https://libvirt.org -o-
https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|:
https://entangle-photo.org -o-
https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|