Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> writes: > On 03/26/2015 09:55 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> writes: >> >>> Demonstrate that the qapi generator doesn't deal well with >>> expressions that aren't up to par. Later patches will improve >>> the expected results as the generator is made stricter. Only >>> one of the added tests actually behaves sanely at rejecting >>> obvious problems. >>> >> >> qapi-code-gen.txt documents the naming conventions: >> >> Types, commands, and events share a common namespace. Therefore, >> generally speaking, type definitions should always use CamelCase for >> user-defined type names, while built-in types are lowercase. Type >> definitions should not end in 'Kind', as this namespace is used for >> creating implicit C enums for visiting union types. Command names, >> and field names within a type, should be all lower case with words >> separated by a hyphen. However, some existing older commands and >> complex types use underscore; when extending such expressions, >> consistency is preferred over blindly avoiding underscore. Event >> names should be ALL_CAPS with words separated by underscore. The >> special string '**' appears for some commands that manually perform >> their own type checking rather than relying on the type-safe code >> produced by the qapi code generators. >> >> We should either enforce the conventions consistently, or not at all. >> >> Enforcing them makes certain kinds of name clashes in generated C >> impossible. If we don't enforce them, we should catch the clashes. >> >> Since I haven't read to the end of your series, I have to ask: do you >> intend to enforce them? > > I added tests to enforce it for event names, but did not enforce things > for command names or complex type members. I guess that can be added on > top, if desired. > > So, did this patch get R-b?
I'd rather not enforce naming conventions just for events. If we want to enforce them, let's do it consistently, and in a separate series that includes this patch. Okay?
