On 02/27/2014 04:09 AM, Wenchao Xia wrote: > From: Wenchao Xia <xiaw...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > It is bad that same key was specified twice, especially when a union have
s/have/has/
> two branches with same condition. This patch can prevent it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wenchao Xia <xiaw...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Wenchao Xia <wenchaoq...@gmail.com>
Again, the double S-o-B is odd.
> ---
> scripts/qapi.py | 2 ++
> tests/Makefile | 3 ++-
> tests/qapi-schema/duplicate-key.err | 1 +
> tests/qapi-schema/duplicate-key.exit | 1 +
> tests/qapi-schema/duplicate-key.json | 2 ++
> 5 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 tests/qapi-schema/duplicate-key.err
> create mode 100644 tests/qapi-schema/duplicate-key.exit
> create mode 100644 tests/qapi-schema/duplicate-key.json
> create mode 100644 tests/qapi-schema/duplicate-key.out
>
> +++ b/tests/qapi-schema/duplicate-key.json
> @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
> +{ 'key': 'value',
> + 'key': 'value' }
This tests a duplicate key in a dictionary. Since unions use
'data':{dictionary}, that means you caught duplicate branches within a
union. Based on your test, your patch also has the nice effect of
catching duplicates unrelated to unions! This test is of a top-level
struct; a bit more realistic might be:
{ 'command': 'foo',
'command': 'foo', 'data': {} }
Meanwhile, should we also test for duplicates in non-dict locations,
such as:
{ 'enum': 'Foo', 'data': [ 'value', 'value' ] }
or even tests of duplicate top-level items, such as:
{ 'type': 'Dup', 'data': { 'field':'str' } }
{ 'type': 'Dup', 'data': { 'field':'str' } }
But I'm okay with that as a followup, in the interest of getting this
series in.
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com>
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
