From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38400) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnj1g-0005fD-A0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 05:45:57 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnj1d-0004g2-0W for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 05:45:56 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:51546) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnj1c-0004fs-R4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 05:45:52 -0400 From: Markus Armbruster References: <1489385927-6735-1-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com> <1489385927-6735-4-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 10:45:44 +0100 In-Reply-To: (=?utf-8?Q?=22Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau"'s message of "Tue, 14 Mar 2017 08:28:24 +0000") Message-ID: <8737egmbsn.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-2.9 03/47] qapi: Back out doc comments added just to please qapi.py List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?utf-8?Q?Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau writes: > Hi > > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 10:36 AM Markus Armbruster > wrote: > >> This reverts commit 3313b61's changes to tests/qapi-schema/, except >> for tests/qapi-schema/doc-*. >> >> > Do we expect those files to change? If not, or not much, I think i't s > rather better to keep the docs to exercise the parser in various > situations. Point taken, but I think the proper way to exercise doc comments is systematic test cases in qapi-schema-test.json, or perhaps a separate test schema we create just for exercising doc comments. Probably should include a qapi2texi.py run complete with diff to golden .texi. > It doesn't reduce the merits of the doc pragma though for oth= er > cases, which I wish I would have suggested (but I didn't like the initial > series to grow more features) We were both pretty desperate to get your work in without further delays.