Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> writes: > Am 16.02.2021 um 16:14 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben: >> Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> writes: >> >> > Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> >> [...] >> > diff --git a/tests/qapi-schema/alias-name-bad-type.err >> > b/tests/qapi-schema/alias-name-bad-type.err >> > new file mode 100644 >> > index 0000000000..489f45ff9b >> > --- /dev/null >> > +++ b/tests/qapi-schema/alias-name-bad-type.err >> > @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ >> > +alias-name-bad-type.json: In struct 'AliasStruct0': >> > +alias-name-bad-type.json:1: alias member 'name' requires a string name >> >> Would "'aliases' member 'name'..." be more consistent? > > 'aliases' is a list, not a single alias definition, so technically it > would have to be "'aliases' member member 'name'...", which I feel is a > bit too confusing.
Indeed. I think glossing over the list is excusable. > I think I have consistently used "alias" for "'aliases' member" > everywhere, though. At least, that was the intention. A different way of glossing over details. Should do as well. I'll double-check consistency.