Hi, On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 01:40:50PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Victor Toso <victort...@redhat.com> writes: > > > The example output is setting optional member "backing" with null. > > This has no runtime impact. Remove it. > > > > Problem was noticed when using the example as a test case for Go > > bindings. > > "Fix example" and "problem" implies there's something wrong. > "No runtime impact" sounds like it's redundant, but not wrong. > Wrong or not wrong?
I take your comment is more about the wording which is confusing.
Would it be better if I change to:
'''
The example output is setting optional member "backing" with
null. While this has no runtime impact, setting optional
members with empty value should not be encouraged. Remove it.
'''
While I think the above is true, my main reason for proposing
this change is to re-use the example as a test case, but I'm not
sure if adding anything related to it would make it better (only
more confusing!).
Cheers,
Victor
> > Signed-off-by: Victor Toso <victort...@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > qapi/block-core.json | 4 +---
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/qapi/block-core.json b/qapi/block-core.json
> > index dcc6d41494..302164d575 100644
> > --- a/qapi/block-core.json
> > +++ b/qapi/block-core.json
> > @@ -1542,9 +1542,7 @@
> > # "arguments": { "driver": "qcow2",
> > # "node-name": "node1534",
> > # "data-file": { "driver": "file",
> > -# "filename": "hd1.qcow2" },
> > -# "backing": null } }
> > -#
> > +# "filename": "hd1.qcow2" } } }
> > # <- { "return": {} }
> > #
> > # -> { "execute": "blockdev-snapshot",
>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
