qemu/tests/qapi-schema/alternate-conflict-string.json

# alternate branches of 'str' type conflict with all scalar types
{ 'alternate': 'Alt',
  'data': { 'one': 'str',
            'two': 'int' } }
qapi: Reject alternates that can't work with keyval_parse() Alternates are sum types like unions, but use the JSON type on the wire / QType in QObject instead of an explicit tag. That's why we require alternate members to have distinct QTypes. The recently introduced keyval_parse() (commit d454dbe) can only produce string scalars. The qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval() input visitor mostly hides the difference, so code using a QObject input visitor doesn't have to care whether its input was parsed from JSON or KEY=VALUE,... The difference leaks for alternates, as noted in commit 0ee9ae7: a non-string, non-enum scalar alternate value can't currently be expressed. In part, this is just our insufficiently sophisticated implementation. Consider alternate type 'GuestFileWhence'. It has an integer member and a 'QGASeek' member. The latter is an enumeration with values 'set', 'cur', 'end'. The meaning of b=set, b=cur, b=end, b=0, b=1 and so forth is perfectly obvious. However, our current implementation falls apart at run time for b=0, b=1, and so forth. Fixable, but not today; add a test case and a TODO comment. Now consider an alternate type with a string and an integer member. What's the meaning of a=42? Is it the string "42" or the integer 42? Whichever meaning you pick makes the other inexpressible. This isn't just an implementation problem, it's fundamental. Our current implementation will pick string. So far, we haven't needed such alternates. To make sure we stop and think before we add one that cannot sanely work with keyval_parse(), let's require alternate members to have sufficiently distinct representation in KEY=VALUE,... syntax: * A string member clashes with any other scalar member * An enumeration member clashes with bool members when it has value 'on' or 'off'. * An enumeration member clashes with numeric members when it has a value that starts with '-', '+', or a decimal digit. This is a rather lazy approximation of the actual number syntax accepted by the visitor. Note that enumeration values starting with '-' and '+' are rejected elsewhere already, but better safe than sorry. Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> Message-Id: <1495471335-23707-5-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> 2017-05-22 19:42:15 +03:00			`# alternate branches of 'str' type conflict with all scalar types`
qapi: Use 'alternate' to replace anonymous union 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> 2015-05-04 18:05:13 +03:00			`{ 'alternate': 'Alt',`
qapi: Add some union tests 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> 2015-05-04 18:05:05 +03:00			`'data': { 'one': 'str',`
qapi: Reject alternates that can't work with keyval_parse() Alternates are sum types like unions, but use the JSON type on the wire / QType in QObject instead of an explicit tag. That's why we require alternate members to have distinct QTypes. The recently introduced keyval_parse() (commit d454dbe) can only produce string scalars. The qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval() input visitor mostly hides the difference, so code using a QObject input visitor doesn't have to care whether its input was parsed from JSON or KEY=VALUE,... The difference leaks for alternates, as noted in commit 0ee9ae7: a non-string, non-enum scalar alternate value can't currently be expressed. In part, this is just our insufficiently sophisticated implementation. Consider alternate type 'GuestFileWhence'. It has an integer member and a 'QGASeek' member. The latter is an enumeration with values 'set', 'cur', 'end'. The meaning of b=set, b=cur, b=end, b=0, b=1 and so forth is perfectly obvious. However, our current implementation falls apart at run time for b=0, b=1, and so forth. Fixable, but not today; add a test case and a TODO comment. Now consider an alternate type with a string and an integer member. What's the meaning of a=42? Is it the string "42" or the integer 42? Whichever meaning you pick makes the other inexpressible. This isn't just an implementation problem, it's fundamental. Our current implementation will pick string. So far, we haven't needed such alternates. To make sure we stop and think before we add one that cannot sanely work with keyval_parse(), let's require alternate members to have sufficiently distinct representation in KEY=VALUE,... syntax: * A string member clashes with any other scalar member * An enumeration member clashes with bool members when it has value 'on' or 'off'. * An enumeration member clashes with numeric members when it has a value that starts with '-', '+', or a decimal digit. This is a rather lazy approximation of the actual number syntax accepted by the visitor. Note that enumeration values starting with '-' and '+' are rejected elsewhere already, but better safe than sorry. Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> Message-Id: <1495471335-23707-5-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> 2017-05-22 19:42:15 +03:00			`'two': 'int' } }`