On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 10:21 AM Morten Brørup <m...@smartsharesystems.com> wrote: > > > It seems to me that these values are Boolean, and should be true or > > false (not surrounded by quotation marks), instead of some string > > representing a Boolean value. Note: This would require expanding the > > telemetry library with a Boolean type. > > > > Indeed. > > > > > > > > Alternatively, use integer values 0 or 1. > > > > > > If we want to represent Boolean values as strings, I vote for "TRUE" > > and "FALSE", using all upper case to indicate that they are magic > > strings - and also to help avoid confusion with the JSON true/false > > Boolean values, which are all lower case. > > > > Introducing those strings is confusing, especially if we later > > introduce the boolean type. > > I had a quick try and adding the boolean type is relatively easy (I > > just posted a patch, see > > https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20221019073702.3948624-1- > > david.march...@redhat.com/). > > > > I would either go with adding this new type (though we are past rc1, > > this addition is self contained and low risk), or use simple integers. > > +1 to adding this new type. > > It might be wider ranging, though: > > Are other existing telemetry data in fact Boolean, but currently using some > other type, and should switch to using the new Boolean type too?
I wondered about the same :-) but I did not check, for now. -- David marchand
