aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/tests/qapi-schema/flat-union-bad-discriminator.err
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2017-03-16qapi: Back out doc comments added just to please qapi.pyMarkus Armbruster
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>
2017-01-16qapi: add qapi2texi scriptMarc-André Lureau
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>
2015-05-05qapi: Require valid namesEric Blake
Previous commits demonstrated that the generator overlooked various bad naming situations: - types, commands, and events need a valid name - enum members must be valid names, when combined with prefix - union and alternate branches cannot be marked optional Valid upstream names match [a-zA-Z][a-zA-Z0-9_-]*; valid downstream names match __[a-zA-Z][a-zA-Z0-9._-]*. Enumerations match the weaker [a-zA-Z0-9._-]+ (in part thanks to QKeyCode picking an enum that starts with a digit, which we can't change now due to backwards compatibility). Rather than call out three separate regex, this patch just uses a broader combination that allows both upstream and downstream names, as well as a small hack that realizes that any enum name is merely a suffix to an already valid name prefix (that is, any enum name is valid if prepending _ fits the normal rules). We could reject new enumeration names beginning with a digit by whitelisting existing exceptions. We could also be stricter about the distinction between upstream names (no leading underscore, no use of dot) and downstream (mandatory leading double underscore), but it is probably not worth the bother. Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
2015-05-05qapi: Use 'alternate' to replace anonymous unionEric Blake
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>
2015-05-05qapi: Tighten checking of unionsEric Blake
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>
2015-05-05qapi: Add some union testsEric Blake
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>