John Snow <[email protected]> writes:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 6:55 AM Markus Armbruster <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> John Snow <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>> > This clarifies sections that are mistaken by the parser as "intro"
>> > sections to be "details" sections instead.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: John Snow <[email protected]>
>> > ---
>> > qapi/machine.json | 2 ++
>> > qapi/migration.json | 4 ++++
>> > qapi/qom.json | 4 ++++
>> > qapi/yank.json | 2 ++
>> > scripts/qapi/parser.py | 8 ++++++++
>> > 5 files changed, 20 insertions(+)
>>
>> Missing updates for the new syntax
>>
>> * Documentation: docs/devel/qapi-code-gen.rst
>>
>
>> * Positive test case(s): tests/qapi-schema/doc-good.json
>>
>> * Maybe a negative test case for _tag_check() failure
>>
>>
> Understood; I wasn't entirely sure if this concept would fly, so I saved
> the polish and you got an RFC quality patch. Forgive me, please! If you
As I wrote in review of PATCH 28, this is good strategy.
> think this approach is fine, I will certainly do all the things you
> outlined above.
>
>
>> [...]
>>
>> > diff --git a/scripts/qapi/parser.py b/scripts/qapi/parser.py
>> > index c5d2b950a82..5890a13b5ba 100644
>> > --- a/scripts/qapi/parser.py
>> > +++ b/scripts/qapi/parser.py
>> > @@ -544,6 +544,14 @@ def _tag_check(what: str) -> None:
>> > raise QAPIParseError(
>> > self, 'feature descriptions expected')
>> > have_tagged = True
>> > + elif line == 'Details:':
>> > + _tag_check("Details")
>>
>> This one.
>>
>
> ACK
>
>
>>
>> > + self.accept(False)
>> > + line = self.get_doc_line()
>> > + while line == '':
>> > + self.accept(False)
>> > + line = self.get_doc_line()
>> > + have_tagged = True
>> > elif match := self._match_at_name_colon(line):
>> > # description
>> > if have_tagged:
>>
>>
