Re: [libvirt] [libvirt-glib] Add getter for GVirConfigDomainOS.arch

On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 05:45:31AM +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: >> From: "Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)" <zeeshanak(a)gnome.org&gt; >> >> --- >>  libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-os.c |    7 +++++++ >>  libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-os.h |    1 + >>  libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig.sym         |    1 + >>  3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-os.c b/libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-os.c >> index 9a1648a..2e4a69a 100644 >> --- a/libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-os.c >> +++ b/libvirt-gconfig/libvirt-gconfig-domain-os.c >> @@ -275,6 +275,13 @@ GList *gvir_config_domain_os_get_boot_devices(GVirConfigDomainOs *os) >>      return devices; >>  } >> >> +const char *gvir_config_domain_os_get_arch(GVirConfigDomainOs *os) >> +{ > > g_return_val_if_fail(GVIR_CONFIG_IS_DOMAIN_OS(os), NULL); > > ACK with this added. Is it fine to return NULL when no arch is specified, > or would it be better to return something else? I'm not very sure about returing default values in general since thats very much a policy decision and we are not giving any clue to the app that we are making the decision for it. Just saying I'm not sure, not that I actually have a strong opinion either way.