On 11/03/2015 12:56 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Eric Blake writes:
>
>> On 11/02/2015 08:37 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Not checked: variant's members don't collide with non-variant members.
>>> I think this check got lost when we simplified
>>> QAPISchemaObjectTypeVariants to hold
Eric Blake writes:
> On 11/02/2015 08:37 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>
>>
>> Not checked: variant's members don't collide with non-variant members.
>> I think this check got lost when we simplified
>> QAPISchemaObjectTypeVariants to hold a single member.
>
> Yep, I found the culprit: in your v2
On 11/02/2015 08:37 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>
> Not checked: variant's members don't collide with non-variant members.
> I think this check got lost when we simplified
> QAPISchemaObjectTypeVariants to hold a single member.
Yep, I found the culprit: in your v2 proposal for QAPISchema, you h
On 11/02/2015 08:37 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Eric Blake writes:
>
>> Now that we have separate namespaces for QMP vs. tag values,
>
> What's the "QMP namespace"?
I guess I need to be more explicit :)
In the generated C struct for a qapi object, we now have two separate
namespaces:
struc
Eric Blake writes:
> Now that we have separate namespaces for QMP vs. tag values,
What's the "QMP namespace"?
> we can simplify how the QAPISchema*.check() methods check for
> collisions.
I *guess* the point of this patch is dropping checks that are obsolete
now tag values no longer collide wi
Now that we have separate namespaces for QMP vs. tag values,
we can simplify how the QAPISchema*.check() methods check for
collisions. Each QAPISchemaObjectTypeMember check() call is
given a single set of names it must not collide with; this set
is either the QMP names (when this member is used by
