summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/tests/qapi-schema/flat-union-inline.json
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* qapi: add a dictionary form for TYPEMarc-André Lureau2018-12-131-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Wherever a struct/union/alternate/command/event member with NAME: TYPE form is accepted, desugar it to a NAME: { 'type': TYPE } form. This will allow to add new member details, such as 'if' in the following patch to introduce conditionals, or 'default' for default values etc. Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> Message-Id: <20181213123724.4866-13-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
* qapi: Back out doc comments added just to please qapi.pyMarkus Armbruster2017-03-161-10/+0Star
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This reverts commit 3313b61's changes to tests/qapi-schema/, except for tests/qapi-schema/doc-*. We could keep some of these doc comments to serve as positive test cases. However, they don't actually add to what we get from doc comment use in actual schemas, as we we don't test output matches expectations, and don't systematically cover doc comment features. Proper positive test coverage would be nice. Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> Message-Id: <1489582656-31133-4-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
* qapi: add qapi2texi scriptMarc-André Lureau2017-01-161-0/+10
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | As the name suggests, the qapi2texi script converts JSON QAPI description into a texi file suitable for different target formats (info/man/txt/pdf/html...). It parses the following kind of blocks: Free-form: ## # = Section # == Subsection # # Some text foo with *emphasis* # 1. with a list # 2. like that # # And some code: # | $ echo foo # | -> do this # | <- get that # ## Symbol description: ## # @symbol: # # Symbol body ditto ergo sum. Foo bar # baz ding. # # @param1: the frob to frobnicate # @param2: #optional how hard to frobnicate # # Returns: the frobnicated frob. # If frob isn't frobnicatable, GenericError. # # Since: version # Notes: notes, comments can have # - itemized list # - like this # # Example: # # -> { "execute": "quit" } # <- { "return": {} } # ## That's roughly following the following EBNF grammar: api_comment = "##\n" comment "##\n" comment = freeform_comment | symbol_comment freeform_comment = { "# " text "\n" | "#\n" } symbol_comment = "# @" name ":\n" { member | tag_section | freeform_comment } member = "# @" name ':' [ text ] "\n" freeform_comment tag_section = "# " ( "Returns:", "Since:", "Note:", "Notes:", "Example:", "Examples:" ) [ text ] "\n" freeform_comment text = free text with markup Note that the grammar is ambiguous: a line "# @foo:\n" can be parsed both as freeform_comment and as symbol_comment. The actual parser recognizes symbol_comment. See docs/qapi-code-gen.txt for more details. Deficiencies and limitations: - the generated QMP documentation includes internal types - union type support is lacking - type information is lacking in generated documentation - doc comment error message positions are imprecise, they point to the beginning of the comment. - a few minor issues, all marked TODO/FIXME in the code Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> Message-Id: <20170113144135.5150-16-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> [test-qapi.py tweaked to avoid trailing empty lines in .out] Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
* qapi: Reuse code for flat union base validationEric Blake2015-10-121-2/+2
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Rather than open-code the check for a valid base type, we should reuse the common functionality. This allows for consistent error messages, and also makes it easier for a later patch to turn on support for inline anonymous base structures. Test flat-union-inline is updated to test only one feature (anonymous branch dictionaries), which can be implemented independently (test flat-union-bad-base already covers the idea of an anonymous base dictionary). Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> Message-Id: <1443565276-4535-10-git-send-email-eblake@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
* qapi: Use 'struct' instead of 'type' in schemaEric Blake2015-05-051-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Referring to "type" as both a meta-type (built-in, enum, union, alternate, or struct) and a specific type (the name that the schema uses for declaring structs) is confusing. Do the bulk of the conversion to "struct" in qapi schema, with a fairly mechanical: for f in `find -name '*.json'; do sed -i "s/'type'/'struct'/"; done followed by manually filtering out the places where we have a 'type' embedded in 'data'. Then tweak a couple of tests whose output changes slightly due to longer lines. I also verified that the generated files for QMP and QGA (such as qmp-commands.h) are the same before and after, as assurance that I didn't leave in any accidental member name changes. Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
* qapi: Prefer 'struct' over 'type' in generatorEric Blake2015-05-051-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Referring to "type" as both a meta-type (built-in, enum, union, alternate, or struct) and a specific type (the name that the schema uses for declaring structs) is confusing. The confusion is only made worse by the fact that the generator mostly already refers to struct even when dealing with expr['type']. This commit changes the generator to consistently refer to it as struct everywhere, plus a single back-compat tweak that allows accepting the existing .json files as-is, so that the meat of this change is separate from the mindless churn of that change. Fix the testsuite fallout for error messages that change, and in some cases, become more legible. Improve comments to better match our intentions where a struct (rather than any complex type) is required. Note that in some cases, an error message now refers to 'struct' while the schema still refers to 'type'; that will be cleaned up in the later commit to the schema. Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
* qapi: Tighten checking of unionsEric Blake2015-05-051-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Previous commits demonstrated that the generator had several flaws with less-than-perfect unions: - a simple union that listed the same branch twice (or two variant names that map to the same C enumerator, including the implicit MAX sentinel) ended up generating invalid C code - an anonymous union that listed two branches with the same qtype ended up generating invalid C code - the generator crashed on anonymous union attempts to use an array type - the generator was silently ignoring a base type for anonymous unions - the generator allowed unknown types or nested anonymous unions as a branch in an anonymous union Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
* qapi: Add some union testsEric Blake2015-05-051-0/+11
Demonstrate that the qapi generator doesn't deal well with unions that aren't up to par. Later patches will update the expected reseults as the generator is made stricter. A few tests work as planned, but most show poor or missing error messages. Of particular note, qapi-code-gen.txt documents 'base' only for flat unions, but the tests here demonstrate that we currently allow a 'base' to a simple union, although it is exercised only in the testsuite. Later patches will remove this undocumented feature, to give us more flexibility in adding other future extensions to union types. For example, one possible extension is the idea of a type-safe simple enum, where added fields tie the discriminator to a user-defined enum type rather than creating an implicit enum from the names in 'data'. But adding such safety on top of a simple enum with a base type could look ambiguous with a flat enum; besides, the documentation also mentions how any simple union can be represented by an equivalent flat union. So it will be simpler to just outlaw support for something we aren't using. Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>