From: Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org> To: Philippe Proulx <pproulx@efficios.com> Cc: Diamon discuss <diamon-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>, lttng-dev <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>, Jeremie Galarneau <jgalar@efficios.com>, Genevieve Bastien <gbastien+lttng@versatic.net> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH CTF 1/3] Clarify that unlisted enum values are implementation-defined Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 08:08:04 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview] Message-ID: <104691146.75724.1588162084473.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <1859708486.72922.1588099890391.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> ----- On Apr 28, 2020, at 2:51 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com wrote: > ----- On Apr 28, 2020, at 2:40 PM, Philippe Proulx pproulx@efficios.com wrote: > >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> >>> To: "gbastien+lttng" <gbastien+lttng@versatic.net>, "Matthew Khouzam" >>> <matthew.khouzam@ericsson.com>, >>> diamon-discuss@linuxfoundation.org, pproulx@efficios.com, "Jeremie Galarneau" >>> <jgalar@efficios.com> >>> Cc: "lttng-dev" <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>, "Mathieu Desnoyers" >>> <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> >>> Sent: Thursday, 23 April, 2020 16:52:24 >>> Subject: [RFC PATCH CTF 1/3] Clarify that unlisted enum values are >>> implementation-defined >> >>> From: Geneviève Bastien <gbastien+lttng@versatic.net> >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Geneviève Bastien <gbastien+lttng@versatic.net> >>> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> >>> --- >>> common-trace-format-specification.md | 3 +++ >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/common-trace-format-specification.md >>> b/common-trace-format-specification.md >>> index fd49e59..f5fea51 100644 >>> --- a/common-trace-format-specification.md >>> +++ b/common-trace-format-specification.md >>> @@ -464,6 +464,9 @@ enum { >>> } >>> ~~~ >>> >>> +The mappings in the enumeration type do not have to be exhaustive. >>> +Unlisted values are implementation defined. >>> + >> >> Why not just: >> >> An enumeration field can have an integral value which its type does not >> map to a string. >> >> ? > > Good point, I will use that wording. Geneviève pointed out on IRC that the sentence above is weird. Would the following convey the right meaning ? "An enumeration field can have an integral value for which the associated enumeration type does not map to a string." Thanks, Mathieu > > Thanks, > > Mathieu > >> >> Phil >> >>> ### 4.2 Compound types >>> >>> Compound are aggregation of type declarations. Compound types include >>> -- >> > 2.11.0 > > -- > Mathieu Desnoyers > EfficiOS Inc. > http://www.efficios.com -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com _______________________________________________ lttng-dev mailing list lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org> To: Philippe Proulx <pproulx@efficios.com> Cc: Diamon discuss <diamon-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>, lttng-dev <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>, Jeremie Galarneau <jgalar@efficios.com>, Genevieve Bastien <gbastien+lttng@versatic.net> Subject: Re: [lttng-dev] [RFC PATCH CTF 1/3] Clarify that unlisted enum values are implementation-defined Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 08:08:04 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview] Message-ID: <104691146.75724.1588162084473.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw) Message-ID: <20200429120804.0dTRM3OSPJkrujD6YwAfm3iPpph46mxPdT8VvBZHmLE@z> (raw) In-Reply-To: <1859708486.72922.1588099890391.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> ----- On Apr 28, 2020, at 2:51 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com wrote: > ----- On Apr 28, 2020, at 2:40 PM, Philippe Proulx pproulx@efficios.com wrote: > >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> >>> To: "gbastien+lttng" <gbastien+lttng@versatic.net>, "Matthew Khouzam" >>> <matthew.khouzam@ericsson.com>, >>> diamon-discuss@linuxfoundation.org, pproulx@efficios.com, "Jeremie Galarneau" >>> <jgalar@efficios.com> >>> Cc: "lttng-dev" <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>, "Mathieu Desnoyers" >>> <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> >>> Sent: Thursday, 23 April, 2020 16:52:24 >>> Subject: [RFC PATCH CTF 1/3] Clarify that unlisted enum values are >>> implementation-defined >> >>> From: Geneviève Bastien <gbastien+lttng@versatic.net> >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Geneviève Bastien <gbastien+lttng@versatic.net> >>> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> >>> --- >>> common-trace-format-specification.md | 3 +++ >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/common-trace-format-specification.md >>> b/common-trace-format-specification.md >>> index fd49e59..f5fea51 100644 >>> --- a/common-trace-format-specification.md >>> +++ b/common-trace-format-specification.md >>> @@ -464,6 +464,9 @@ enum { >>> } >>> ~~~ >>> >>> +The mappings in the enumeration type do not have to be exhaustive. >>> +Unlisted values are implementation defined. >>> + >> >> Why not just: >> >> An enumeration field can have an integral value which its type does not >> map to a string. >> >> ? > > Good point, I will use that wording. Geneviève pointed out on IRC that the sentence above is weird. Would the following convey the right meaning ? "An enumeration field can have an integral value for which the associated enumeration type does not map to a string." Thanks, Mathieu > > Thanks, > > Mathieu > >> >> Phil >> >>> ### 4.2 Compound types >>> >>> Compound are aggregation of type declarations. Compound types include >>> -- >> > 2.11.0 > > -- > Mathieu Desnoyers > EfficiOS Inc. > http://www.efficios.com -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com _______________________________________________ lttng-dev mailing list lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-29 12:08 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-04-23 20:52 [RFC PATCH CTF 0/3] Common Trace Format Updates (upcoming 1.8.3) Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev 2020-04-23 20:52 ` [RFC PATCH CTF 1/3] Clarify that unlisted enum values are implementation-defined Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev 2020-04-23 22:51 ` Jérémie Galarneau via lttng-dev 2020-04-24 14:05 ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev 2020-04-24 14:05 ` [lttng-dev] " Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev 2020-04-28 18:40 ` Philippe Proulx via lttng-dev 2020-04-28 18:40 ` [lttng-dev] " Philippe Proulx via lttng-dev 2020-04-28 18:51 ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev 2020-04-28 18:51 ` [lttng-dev] " Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev 2020-04-29 12:08 ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev [this message] 2020-04-29 12:08 ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev 2020-04-29 16:50 ` Philippe Proulx via lttng-dev 2020-04-29 16:50 ` [lttng-dev] " Philippe Proulx via lttng-dev 2020-04-23 20:52 ` [RFC PATCH CTF 2/3] Clarify monotonicity requirement on timestamp begin Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev 2020-04-28 18:42 ` Philippe Proulx via lttng-dev 2020-04-28 18:42 ` [lttng-dev] " Philippe Proulx via lttng-dev 2020-04-28 18:54 ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev 2020-04-28 18:54 ` [lttng-dev] " Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev 2020-04-23 20:52 ` [RFC PATCH CTF 3/3] Clarify that timestamp begin/end need to be complete clock values Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=104691146.75724.1588162084473.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com \ --to=lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org \ --cc=diamon-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org \ --cc=gbastien+lttng@versatic.net \ --cc=jgalar@efficios.com \ --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \ --cc=pproulx@efficios.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).