| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
The documentation claims that alternates are useful for
allowing two or more types, although nothing enforces this.
Meanwhile, it is silent on whether empty unions are allowed.
In practice, the generated code will compile, in part because
we have a 'void *data' branch; but attempting to visit such a
type will cause an abort(). While there's no technical reason
that a degenerate union could not be made to work, it's harder
to justify the time spent in chasing known (the current
abort() during visit) and unknown corner cases, than it would
be to just outlaw them. A future patch will probably take the
approach of forbidding them; in the meantime, we can at least
add testsuite coverage to make it obvious where things stand.
In addition to adding tests to expose the problems, we also
need to adjust existing tests that are meant to test something
else, but which could fail for the wrong reason if we reject
degenerate alternates/unions.
Note that empty structs are explicitly supported (for example,
right now they are the only way to specify that one branch of a
flat union adds no additional members), and empty enums are
covered by the testsuite as working (even if they do not seem
to have much use).
Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1443565276-4535-8-git-send-email-eblake@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
|
|
Previous patches have led up to the point where I create the
new meta-type "'alternate':'Foo'". See the previous patches
for documentation; I intentionally split as much work into
earlier patches to minimize the size of this patch, but a lot
of it is churn due to testsuite fallout after updating to the
new type.
Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
|
|
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>
|
|
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>
|
