On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 09:15:13AM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 30.07.2020 um 17:11 hat Eric Blake geschrieben: > > > The QAPI schema language has two layers: > > > > > > * JSON, with a lexical and a syntactical sub-layer (both in parser.py) > > > > > > * QAPI, with a context-free and a context-dependend sub-layer (in > > > expr.py and schema.py, respectively) > > > > > > Replacing the JSON layer is possible as long as the replacement is > > > sufficiently expressive (not a tall order). > > > > I'm open to the idea, if we want to attempt it, and agree with the > > assessment that it is not a tall order. > > I'm not so sure about that. I mean, it certainly sounds doable if need > be, but getting better syntax highlighting by default in some editors > feels like a pretty weak reason to switch out the complete schema > language.
The main compelling reason to me is that we get to throw away our custom written parsing code and use a standard python library. Actually following a standardized document format is a benefit to contributors, over something that looks like a standard format but is actually slightly different as it is our own parser. Automatic correct syntax highlighting is a happy side effect. More interesting is if the editor automatically does the right thing with indentation/formatting when writing schemas. I wont miss the "not allowed a trailing comma after the last field" part of JSON as I always get it wrong. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
