From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57099)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1Zw3Ta-0007CZ-OS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 02:36:23 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1Zw3TX-0000Rk-GS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 02:36:22 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:47211)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1Zw3TX-0000RB-BY
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 02:36:19 -0500
From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
References: <1446791754-23823-1-git-send-email-eblake@redhat.com>
	<1446791754-23823-13-git-send-email-eblake@redhat.com>
	<87wptvyvk7.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <5641089A.7040506@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 08:36:15 +0100
In-Reply-To: <5641089A.7040506@redhat.com> (Eric Blake's message of "Mon, 9
	Nov 2015 13:56:58 -0700")
Message-ID: <877flq487k.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v10 12/30] qapi-introspect: Document lack
	of sorting
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: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> writes:

> On 11/06/2015 08:52 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> writes:
>> 
>>> qapi-code-gen.txt already claims that types, commands, and
>>> events share a common namespace; set this in stone by further
>>> documenting that our introspection output will never have
>>> collisions with the same name tied to more than one meta-type.
>>>
>
>>> For these reasons, we simply document that clients should not
>>> rely on any particular order of items in introspection output.
>>> And since it is now a documented part of the contract, we have
>>> the freedom to later rearrange output if needed, without
>>> worrying about breaking well-written clients that were already
>>> aware that they had to do linear searches.
>> 
>> Well, any kind of search that doesn't rely on sorting.  Suggest to drop
>> the "that were already..." clause.  Happy to do that on commit.
>
> I don't see that phrase dropped in your v1 pull request. Worth fixing?

Fixed in PULL v2, thanks!