From: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
To: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>, Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Cc: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 0/7] qapi: Specify default value for optional argument in schema json
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 05:32:18 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <537C8EC2.70803@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140521084225.GA13469@T430.nay.redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2006 bytes --]
On 05/21/2014 02:42 AM, Fam Zheng wrote:
>>>>> Adding three ugly sigils and making everybody include one when they add
>>>>> a nested struct feels much better to me than ugly sigils all over the
>>>>> place.
>>>>
>>>> Well, I could use some background here. Why did we introduce nested structure
>>>> in the first place?
>>>
>>> Because we could?
>>>
>>> Felt like a good idea at the time?
>>>
>>> I quick glance at commit 0f923be and fb3182c suggests they have been
>>> supported since the beginning. There is no design rationale.
>>
>> Let me extend Fam's question: Why don't we simply remove them right
>> now? If it's really only three instances, converting them to full
>> types should be a matter of five minutes.
>>
>
> Actually, my question is: do we want it independently, or do we want to include
> the removal of nested as the first part of this series?
Doing it as an independent series first might be the way forward -
independent so that it doesn't stall on reviews of the new syntax for
default values, and up front because it seems like a simple enough
conversion that then makes the entire generator simpler that it will be
easy to approve and get in tree.
>
> I would prefer the former because I feel uncomfortable with making more changes
> in this series, since there are already many things to do: adding qapi types,
> adding argument property dict, adding all test cases for all of them, updating
> documentation, and apply the new syntax in qapi-schema.json. A non-RFC revision
> could be long and hard to review.
At the end of the day, we want both things; and it makes more sense to
remove the conflicting syntax up front than it does to add an alternate
syntax only to later remove it. Doing it as two shorter series one
after the other rather than cramming it into one long series is
psychologically easier to review.
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 604 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-21 11:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-20 9:07 [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 0/7] qapi: Specify default value for optional argument in schema json Fam Zheng
2014-05-20 9:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] qapi: Allow decimal values Fam Zheng
2014-05-20 15:11 ` Eric Blake
2014-05-20 9:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 2/7] qapi: Allow true, false and null in schema json Fam Zheng
2014-05-20 19:20 ` Eric Blake
2014-05-20 9:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 3/7] tests: Add decimal test cases for qapi-schema Fam Zheng
2014-05-20 12:43 ` Eric Blake
2014-05-20 9:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 4/7] qapi: Add c_val(t, val) for int Fam Zheng
2014-05-20 9:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 5/7] qapi: Add @arg property dictionary syntax Fam Zheng
2014-05-20 9:08 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 6/7] qapi: Initialize argument value in generated code if has 'default' Fam Zheng
2014-05-20 9:08 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 7/7] qmp: Convert block-commit speed to arg property dict Fam Zheng
2014-05-20 9:16 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 0/7] qapi: Specify default value for optional argument in schema json Fam Zheng
2014-05-20 19:13 ` Eric Blake
2014-05-21 1:59 ` Fam Zheng
2014-05-21 5:54 ` Markus Armbruster
2014-05-21 7:09 ` Fam Zheng
2014-05-21 7:46 ` Markus Armbruster
2014-05-21 8:23 ` Kevin Wolf
2014-05-21 8:42 ` Fam Zheng
2014-05-21 9:01 ` Kevin Wolf
2014-05-21 11:32 ` Eric Blake [this message]
2014-05-21 9:35 ` Markus Armbruster
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=537C8EC2.70803@redhat.com \
--to=eblake@redhat.com \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=famz@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).