From: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com>
This hunk
@@ -964,6 +965,7 @@ class QAPISchemaObjectType(QAPISchemaType):
members = []
seen = {}
for m in members:
+ assert c_name(m.name) not in seen
seen[m.name] = m
for m in self.local_members:
m.check(schema, members, seen)
is plainly broken.
Asserting the members inherited from base don't clash is somewhat
redundant, because self.base.check() just checked that. But it
doesn't hurt.
The idea to use c_name(m.name) instead of m.name for collision
checking is sound, because we need to catch clashes between the m.name
and between the c_name(m.name), and when two m.name clash, then their
c_name() also clash.
However, using c_name(m.name) instead of m.name in one of several
places doesn't work. See the very next line.
Keep the assertion, but drop the c_name() for now. A future commit
will bring it back.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1446559499-26984-4-git-send-email-arm...@redhat.com>
[change TABs in commit message to space]
Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com>
---
v10: redo closer to Markus' original proposal
v9: new patch
---
scripts/qapi.py | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/scripts/qapi.py b/scripts/qapi.py
index 0bf8235..86d2adc 100644
--- a/scripts/qapi.py
+++ b/scripts/qapi.py
@@ -987,7 +987,7 @@ class QAPISchemaObjectType(QAPISchemaType):
members = []
seen = {}
for m in members:
- assert c_name(m.name) not in seen
+ assert m.name not in seen
seen[m.name] = m
for m in self.local_members:
m.check(schema)
--
2.4.3
