So you would do a diff if the generated WADL against the expected WADL. That would mean we use both. I think that's a reasonable approach.
On Oct 26, 2011, at 12:31 PM, "Monsyne Dragon" <mdra...@rackspace.com> wrote: > > On Oct 26, 2011, at 10:48 AM, Kevin L. Mitchell wrote: > >> On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 15:30 -0700, Joseph Heck wrote: >>> It sounds like even though most of us hate WADL, it's what we're >>> expending effort after to make a consolidated API set. So unless Nati >>> and Ravi want to switch to using Swagger (or something else), WADL is >>> the direction we're heading. I totally agree with Daryl that reading >>> it is a PITA, and am finding (from my part) that the only definitive >>> way to know about writing the docs and documenting the authoritative >>> API is to read the underlying code. (which is what I suspect Nati >>> likely did with the pull request that adds in WADL for the >>> Nova/OpenCompute extension API) >> >> I wonder if it would be possible to generate much of the WADL from >> introspecting the code itself...surely the URL structure itself can be >> extracted from the paste setup, and the XML templates code I recently >> contributed could easily be traversed to provide at least a basic >> description of the output. That could at least provide a starting point >> for generating WADLs... >> >> (Of course, I propose this, having little idea of what actually goes in >> a WADL, but still... ;) > > I've worked with WADL and WSDL before, and yes, it is indeed possible to > generate the WADL by introspecting code. (with a few decorators/annotations > assisting) > This is what Sandy Walsh is suggesting, and I highly, highly recommend this > approach. Otherwise you have to either generate code from an external WADL, > which makes the code a mess, or keep the WADL in sync with the code manually > (bleh). The big advantage of generating WADLs from the code is that you then > get a machine-readable description of what the *code* thinks the interface > is, not what you *hope* the interface is. That way, if you look at the > generated WADL, and if the interface isn't what it *should* be (as in "Where > did THAT resource come from, and where did the foobar param on that GET > method go?"), you know you have a bug to fix. > > -- > Monsyne M. Dragon > OpenStack/Nova > cell 210-441-0965 > work x 5014190 > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
