Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> writes: > 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 <ebl...@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com>
