On 21/02/2017 16:57, Eric Blake wrote: >> + /* You can retrieve a covariant (superclass) type... */ >> + ret = OBJECT_PROPERTY_GET_PTR(OBJECT(dobj), "qv", >> + UserDefZero, &local_err); >> + g_assert(!local_err); >> + >> + g_assert_cmpint(ret->integer, ==, 0); >> + qapi_free_UserDefZero(ret); > > You coded a non-strict visitor above to allow this to happen, but is it > really what we want? It basically means we are grabbing the property > fields we care about, while ignoring the rest of the property. I guess > it may be okay.
The tests were very useful to write, because I had hardly gotten any of the corner cases right. :) I think these semantics make the most sense. Yeah, it uses non-strict mode but this test provides a reason (namely, covariant return types) why non-strict mode is useful. It makes backwards-compatibility easier. >> + >> + /* Test that the property has not been modified at all */ >> + ret = OBJECT_PROPERTY_GET_PTR(OBJECT(dobj), "qv", >> + UserDefZero, &local_err); >> + g_assert(!local_err); >> + >> + g_assert_cmpint(ret->integer, ==, 0); >> + qapi_free_UserDefZero(ret); >> +} >> + >> +++ b/tests/qapi-schema/qapi-schema-test.json >> @@ -91,6 +91,14 @@ >> '*enum1': 'EnumOne' } } # intentional forward reference >> >> ## >> +# @UserDefOneMore: >> +# for testing nested structs > Is nested the right word here? Just copied from UserDefOne. :) I'll change both to "derived". Paolo
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
