From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48F7FC433DB for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 21:23:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AD2964F5F for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 21:23:04 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9AD2964F5F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:36076 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7Pc7-0000FK-El for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 16:23:03 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44110) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7Pau-0007mz-Th for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 16:21:48 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:25711) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7Paq-0002YL-Gb for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 16:21:48 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1612387303; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=n0cGBGFNFLqS/e0Gpx/E+eFILqb3dvdOVBLKsfesX9o=; b=e2Nbj/mI7vhUK6i408K2qEX3NDqkBYcV1AKWn0lmTF1sirwv2wmM0kfE0LmrV/djzhZtEk QTyiowA3BURlK4/t23sVsO7OKwucczJ5ImSQCQNT5pIlNneoxpyFeB325llV/g58oGkZDH N7HKyuLWOdCE1+IttJbb95+4XBFsV9o= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-261-1a7u40YKPeyPL-g2hYTPtw-1; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 16:21:40 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 1a7u40YKPeyPL-g2hYTPtw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC0B6183CD04; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 21:21:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.10.112.247] (ovpn-112-247.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.112.247]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6127860BFA; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 21:21:39 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/14] qapi/introspect.py: replace 'extra' dict with 'comment' argument To: Markus Armbruster References: <20210202174651.2274166-1-jsnow@redhat.com> <20210202174651.2274166-7-jsnow@redhat.com> <87tuqtteks.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> From: John Snow Message-ID: Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 16:21:38 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87tuqtteks.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=jsnow@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.205.24.124; envelope-from=jsnow@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -34 X-Spam_score: -3.5 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.5 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.539, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.178, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Michael Roth , Cleber Rosa , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Eduardo Habkost Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 2/3/21 9:23 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > John Snow writes: > >> This is only used to pass in a dictionary with a comment already set, so >> skip the runaround and just accept the comment. >> >> This works because _tree_to_qlit() treats 'if': None; 'comment': None >> exactly like absent 'if'; 'comment'. > > Confusing, because the two paragraphs talk about two different things: > > 1. Actual arguments for @extra are either None or {'comment': comment}. > Simplify: replace parameter @extra by parameter @comment. > > 2. Dumb down the return value to always be of the form > > (obj {'if': ifcond, 'comment': comment}) > I think you are drawing attention to the fact that 'if' and 'comment' are now always present in this dict instead of conditionally present. (else, I have misread you. (I think you are missing a comma.)) > I suspect splitting the patch is easier than crafting a clear commit > message for the combined one. > I wouldn't have considered to break out such a small change into two even smaller changes, but as you are in charge here ... Okey Dokey. (meta-tangent: [1]) >> >> Signed-off-by: John Snow >> --- >> scripts/qapi/introspect.py | 18 ++++++++++-------- >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/scripts/qapi/introspect.py b/scripts/qapi/introspect.py >> index d3fbf694ad2..0aa3b77109f 100644 >> --- a/scripts/qapi/introspect.py >> +++ b/scripts/qapi/introspect.py >> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >> See the COPYING file in the top-level directory. >> """ >> >> +from typing import Optional >> + >> from .common import ( >> c_name, >> gen_endif, >> @@ -24,11 +26,11 @@ >> ) >> >> >> -def _make_tree(obj, ifcond, extra=None): >> - if extra is None: >> - extra = {} >> - if ifcond: >> - extra['if'] = ifcond >> +def _make_tree(obj, ifcond, comment=None): >> + extra = { >> + 'if': ifcond, >> + 'comment': comment, >> + } >> return (obj, extra) > > Obvious way to do just 1.: > > def _make_tree(obj, ifcond, comment=None): > extra = {} > if ifcond: > extra['if'] = ifcond > if comment: > extra['comment'] = comment > OK. >> >> >> @@ -174,18 +176,18 @@ def _gen_features(features): >> return [_make_tree(f.name, f.ifcond) for f in features] >> >> def _gen_tree(self, name, mtype, obj, ifcond, features): >> - extra = None >> + comment: Optional[str] = None >> if mtype not in ('command', 'event', 'builtin', 'array'): >> if not self._unmask: >> # Output a comment to make it easy to map masked names >> # back to the source when reading the generated output. >> - extra = {'comment': '"%s" = %s' % (self._name(name), name)} >> + comment = f'"{self._name(name)}" = {name}' >> name = self._name(name) >> obj['name'] = name >> obj['meta-type'] = mtype >> if features: >> obj['features'] = self._gen_features(features) >> - self._trees.append(_make_tree(obj, ifcond, extra)) >> + self._trees.append(_make_tree(obj, ifcond, comment)) >> >> def _gen_member(self, member): >> obj = {'name': member.name, 'type': self._use_type(member.type)} [1] As a matter of process, I sometimes find it cumbersome to intentionally engineer an intermediary state when I jumped straight from A->C in my actual editing. I will usually keep such intermediary forms when they come about naturally in the course of development, but rarely seek to add them artificially -- it feels like a major bummer to engineer, test, and scrutinize code that's only bound to be deleted immediately after. Sometimes, it feels like a waste of reviewer effort, too. It's been years and I still don't think I have any real intuitive sense for this, which is ...unfortunate. --js