Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> writes: > On 11/18/2015 06:12 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> writes: >> >>> Now that we guarantee the user doesn't have any enum values >>> beginning with a single underscore, we can use that for our >>> own purposes. Renaming ENUM_MAX to ENUM__MAX makes it obvious >>> that the sentinel is generated. >> >> The ENUM__MAX are mildly ugly. If we cared, we could get rid of most or >> all uses. Right now, I don't. >> >> Hmm, perhaps these ENUM__MAX are your motivation for rejecting adjacent >> [-_] in the previous patch, to catch clashes like (foolishly named) type >> 'FOO--MAX' with enumeration type 'Foo'. I acknowledge the clash. > > Yes, and that was part of my reasoning on 21/36 - but you've convinced > me to relax that one, so it no longer applies as an argument here. > >> However, there are many more clashes we don't attempt to catch, >> e.g. type 'Foo-lookup' with enumeration type 'Foo'. Perhaps we want to >> build a real fence later, but right now I don't want us to ram in more >> scattered fence laths. >> >> Might want to say something like "Rejecting enum members named 'MAX' is >> now useless, and will be dropped in the next patch". > > Yes, that helps the commit message. Can you handle it, or do I need to > send a fixup?
Can do! >>> This patch was mostly generated by applying a temporary patch: >>> >>> |diff --git a/scripts/qapi.py b/scripts/qapi.py >>> |index e6d014b..b862ec9 100644 >>> |--- a/scripts/qapi.py >>> |+++ b/scripts/qapi.py >>> |@@ -1570,6 +1570,7 @@ const char *const %(c_name)s_lookup[] = { >>> | max_index = c_enum_const(name, 'MAX', prefix) >>> | ret += mcgen(''' >>> | [%(max_index)s] = NULL, >>> |+// %(max_index)s >>> | }; >>> | ''', >>> | max_index=max_index) >>> >>> then running: >>> >>> $ cat qapi-{types,event}.c tests/test-qapi-types.c | >>> sed -n 's,^// \(.*\)MAX,s|\1MAX|\1_MAX|g,p' > list >>> $ git grep -l _MAX | xargs sed -i -f list >>> >>> The only things not generated are the changes in scripts/qapi.py. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> >> >> Patch looks good. > > The fun part was coming up with the automation, and then making sure it > was reproducible. :) May not always be faster than manual, but it sure is a lot more fun! More reliable, too, in my experience.