Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> writes:
> Am 24.03.2015 um 21:03 hat Eric Blake geschrieben:
>> From: Fam Zheng <f...@redhat.com>
>>
>> In the near term, we will use it for a sensible-looking
>> 'gen':false inside command declarations, instead of the
>> current ugly 'gen':'no'.
>>
>> In the long term, it will allow conversion from shorthand
>> with defaults mentioned only in side-band documentation:
>> 'data':{'*flag':'bool', '*string':'str'}
>> into an explicit default value documentation, as in:
>> 'data':{'flag':{'type':'bool', 'optional':true, 'default':true},
>> 'string':{'type':'str', 'optional':true, 'default':null}}
>
> FWIW, I don't think that's a very friendly syntax for humans, it's a bit
> verbose. But that's no reason not to allow true/false/null, of course.
Here's my current thinking.
Longhand:
# mandatory
'name': { 'type': 'str' }
# optional, with a default
'flag': { 'type': 'bool', 'default': true }
# optional, no default
'string': { 'type': 'str', 'default': null }
Presence of 'default' implies optional.
Equivalent shorthand, if any:
'name': 'str'
'*string': 'str'
[...]
