On 1/20/21 7:07 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
John Snow <js...@redhat.com> writes:
Modify visit_module to pass the module itself instead of just its
name. This allows for future patches to centralize some
module-interrogation behavior within the QAPISchemaModule class itself,
cutting down on duplication between gen.py and schema.py.
We've been tempted to make similar changes before (don't worry, I'm not
building a case for "no" here).
It's fine: you'll probably notice later I don't go the full distance and
rely on both object and class methods anyway, so this isn't strictly
needed right now.
(It was not possible to go the full distance without heavier, more
invasive changes, so...)
When I wrote the initial version of QAPISchemaVisitor (commit 3f7dc21be,
2015), I aimed for a loose coupling of backends and the internal
representation. Instead of
def visit_foo(self, foo):
pass
where @foo is a QAPISchemaFooBar, I wrote
def visit_foo_bar(self, name, info, [curated attributes of @foo]):
pass
In theory, this is nice: the information exposed to the backends is
obvious, and the backends can't accidentally mutate @foo.
In practice, it kind of failed right then and there:
def visit_object_type(self, name, info, base, members, variants):
pass
We avoid passing the QAPISchemaObjectType (loose coupling, cool!), only
to pass member information as List[QAPISchemaObjectTypeMember].
Morever, passing "curated atttibutes" has led to visit_commands() taking
a dozen arguments. Meh.
This had made Eric and me wonder whether we should write off the
decoupling idea as misguided, and just pass the object instead of
"curated attributes", always. Thoughts?
I'm not sure. Just taking the object would avoid a lot of duplicated
interface typing, and type hints would allow editors to know what fields
are available.
Signed-off-by: John Snow <js...@redhat.com>
---
docs/sphinx/qapidoc.py | 8 ++++----
scripts/qapi/gen.py | 16 ++++++++++------
scripts/qapi/schema.py | 4 ++--
tests/qapi-schema/test-qapi.py | 4 ++--
4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/docs/sphinx/qapidoc.py b/docs/sphinx/qapidoc.py
index e03abcbb959..f754f675d66 100644
--- a/docs/sphinx/qapidoc.py
+++ b/docs/sphinx/qapidoc.py
@@ -463,11 +463,11 @@ def __init__(self, env, qapidir):
self._env = env
self._qapidir = qapidir
- def visit_module(self, name):
- if name is not None:
- qapifile = self._qapidir + '/' + name
+ def visit_module(self, module):
+ if module.name:
Replacing the "is not None" test by (implicit) "is thruthy" changes
behavior for the empty string. Intentional?
Instinctively it was intentional, consciously it wasn't. I was worried
about what "qapifile" would produce if the string happened to be empty.
I've had the "pleasure" of debugging empty strings getting interpreted
like None where they should be interpreted like any other string.
assert module.name, then?
+ qapifile = self._qapidir + '/' + module.name
self._env.note_dependency(os.path.abspath(qapifile))
- super().visit_module(name)
+ super().visit_module(module)
[...]
