lttng-dev.lists.lttng.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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
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

  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 \
    --subject='Re: [RFC PATCH CTF 1/3] Clarify that unlisted enum values are implementation-defined' \
    /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: link

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).