From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NLL9V-0004tj-5e
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:32:41 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NLL9Q-0004iB-0O
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:32:40 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=44374 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NLL9P-0004i2-RU
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:32:35 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:25116)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1NLL9P-0004ZJ-L5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:32:35 -0500
From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] QMP's success response
References: <20091217154147.22845395@doriath>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:32:30 +0100
In-Reply-To: <20091217154147.22845395@doriath> (Luiz Capitulino's message of
	"Thu, 17 Dec 2009 15:41:47 -0200")
Message-ID: <m3aaxhladd.fsf@crossbow.pond.sub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Cc: aliguori@linux.vnet.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, avi@redhat.com

Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com> writes:

>  Hi there,
>
>  Currently, when a regular command doesn't have any data to output,
> QMP will emit:
>
> { "return": "OK" }
>
>  I thought this was a good idea because it has a clear meaning. Silly me,
> this is optimized for humans, but for machines it introduces the problem
> that such commands can't be changed to return values.
>
>  I'm not sure this is will ever happen, but to stay safe a better way
> would be to return an empty dict, like this:
>
> { "return": {} }
>
>  Which can be read as 'command succeeded, but didn't return any data'.
>
>  As the release is not done yet we still can change it, is anyone against?

I'm very much in favor of it.