On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 9:12 AM Frank Kühndel < frank.kuehn...@embedded-brains.de> wrote:
> Hello Gedare, > > On 12/11/20 4:41 PM, Gedare Bloom wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 8:16 AM Frank Kühndel > > <frank.kuehn...@embedded-brains.de > > <mailto:frank.kuehn...@embedded-brains.de>> wrote: > > > > Hello Joel, > > > > On 12/11/20 3:49 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 8:41 AM Frank Kuehndel > > > <frank.kuehn...@embedded-brains.de > > <mailto:frank.kuehn...@embedded-brains.de> > > > <mailto:frank.kuehn...@embedded-brains.de > > <mailto:frank.kuehn...@embedded-brains.de>>> wrote: > > > > > > From: Frank Kühndel <frank.kuehn...@embedded-brains.de > > <mailto:frank.kuehn...@embedded-brains.de> > > > <mailto:frank.kuehn...@embedded-brains.de > > <mailto:frank.kuehn...@embedded-brains.de>>> > > > > > > --- > > > eng/req/req-for-req.rst | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/eng/req/req-for-req.rst b/eng/req/req-for-req.rst > > > index 9225e95..dcc4c11 100644 > > > --- a/eng/req/req-for-req.rst > > > +++ b/eng/req/req-for-req.rst > > > @@ -308,6 +308,27 @@ spec:/classic/task/create-err-invname > > > > > > ... > > > > > > +If requirements or the YAML files which contain them are to be > > > numbered, > > > +the numbering shall start with 0. For example: > > > > > > + > > > +.. code-block:: none > > > + > > > + weak-alias-0.yml > > > + weak-alias-1.yml > > > + > > > +Smaller numbers shall be prefixed with 0 to the same count of > > digits > > > +as the largest number. For example: > > > > > > > > > When one goes from 99 to 100 requirements and didn't anticipate > having > > > that many, does this mean all the files will have to be renamed? > > > > I can change the text to what Gedare Bloom suggested: "If we know the > > max count (N) ahead of time, ..." > > > > Just from my experience with the requirements for the basedefs, when > I > > create the requirements for an operation, I know the number I end up > > with before checking them in. The issue we discuss would only cause > > trouble if later more requirements for the same operation must be > added. > > This is not totally unlikely but it means that one actually has 9 and > > then need a 10th one. > > > > > > > > Should we start with a minimum of three or four digits? What would > > drive > > > the number of requirements in a set? How large of a functional > > area will > > > a single numbered set contain? > > > > > > I'm just wondering if it is simpler to just have 001 as a minimum. > > > > I think that 99 requirements for a single operation are really out of > > scope. That will hopefully never ever happen. Even 9 is already a > lot. > > Also it is rather advisable to adapt the names of the requirements to > > indicate the purpose. The numbering is more for the case that there > are > > two or more requirements on the same topic (like on handling the same > > bad input argument). > > > > my-function-0 > > my-function-1 > > my-function-global-side-effect > > my-function-bad-argument-x-error-handling > > my-function-bad-argument-y-error-handling > > my-function-called-in-wrong-state > > > > > > This actually means there is a requirement for unnumbered names as well. > > > > Would it be better to explicitly define all requirements numbered and > > use -0, in case they should be extended later, or perhaps to start > > numbering without a number as 0 "implied" and numbers begin with 1? > > > > If there is a -1 then I personally prefer that there should be a -0. For > the basedefs, I ended all requirements with -0 even if there was no -1. > Yet, whether this is the most wisest thing to do, I cannot say. I would > leave it to the author. > > These numbers are mainly for requirements which need to be split: > > my-function.yml > "The function shall return 7 and set global variable X to 5". > > If later someone needs to split this, would renaming it be so much trouble? > > I don't know if renaming them would be a problem or not. Need an expert to weigh in on that. If renaming them introduces challenges, then we should explicitly use -0 for the first requirement always, and not allow unnumbered ones to exist. > my-function-0.yml > "The function shall return 7". > > my-function-1.yml > "The function shall set global variable X to 5". > > Could be as well: > > my-function-result.yml > "The function shall return 7". > > my-function-side-effect.yml > "The function shall set global variable X to 5". > > Greetings > Frank > > > > > My opinion is that defining whether we start counting with 0 or with > 1 > > makes sense. Everything else seems to me a bit like solving > theoretical > > problems. > > > > > > > > + > > > +.. code-block:: none > > > + > > > + alias-00.yml > > > + alias-01.yml > > > + alias-02.yml > > > + ... > > > + alias-09.yml > > > + alias-10.yml > > > + alias-11.yml > > > + > > > Conflict Free Requirements > > > -------------------------- > > > > > > -- > > > 2.26.2 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > devel mailing list > > > devel@rtems.org <mailto:devel@rtems.org> > > <mailto:devel@rtems.org <mailto:devel@rtems.org>> > > > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > <http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel> > > > <http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > <http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel>> > > > > > > > Greetings > > Frank > > _______________________________________________ > > devel mailing list > > devel@rtems.org <mailto:devel@rtems.org> > > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > <http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel> > > >
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
