Eric Blake writes:
> On 09/24/2015 10:29 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>
> +
> +/* FIXME: Order of alternate should not affect semantics */
Inhowfar does it affect semantics? Or asked differently: what exactly
is wrong with this test now?
> +v = visitor_inp
On 09/24/2015 10:29 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>> Any particular reason for adding the initializer?
>>>
v = visitor_input_test_init(data, "42");
-visit_type_UserDefAlternate(v, &tmp, NULL, &err);
-g_assert(err == NULL);
+visit_type_UserDefAlternate
On 09/24/2015 10:29 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
+
+/* FIXME: Order of alternate should not affect semantics */
>>>
>>> Inhowfar does it affect semantics? Or asked differently: what exactly
>>> is wrong with this test now?
>>>
+v = visitor_input_test_init(data, "42");
Eric Blake writes:
> On 09/24/2015 08:36 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Eric Blake writes:
>>
>>> Add some testsuite exposure for use of a 'number' as part of
>>> an alternate. The current state of the tree has a few bugs
>>> exposed by this: our input parser depends on the ordering of
>>> ho
On 09/24/2015 08:36 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Eric Blake writes:
>
>> Add some testsuite exposure for use of a 'number' as part of
>> an alternate. The current state of the tree has a few bugs
>> exposed by this: our input parser depends on the ordering of
>> how the qapi schema declared th
Eric Blake writes:
> Add some testsuite exposure for use of a 'number' as part of
> an alternate. The current state of the tree has a few bugs
> exposed by this: our input parser depends on the ordering of
> how the qapi schema declared the alternate, and the parser
> does not accept integers fo
Add some testsuite exposure for use of a 'number' as part of
an alternate. The current state of the tree has a few bugs
exposed by this: our input parser depends on the ordering of
how the qapi schema declared the alternate, and the parser
does not accept integers for a 'number' in an alternate ev
