Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> writes: > On 3/23/21 4:40 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Naming rules differ for the various kinds of names. To prepare >> enforcing them, define functions to check them: check_name_upper(), >> check_name_lower(), and check_name_camel(). For now, these merely >> wrap around check_name_str(), but that will change shortly. Replace >> the other uses of check_name_str() by appropriate uses of the >> wrappers. No change in behavior just yet. >> >> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> >> --- >> scripts/qapi/expr.py | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- >> 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) >> > >> +++ b/scripts/qapi/expr.py >> @@ -21,11 +21,12 @@ >> from .error import QAPISemError >> >> >> -# Names must be letters, numbers, -, and _. They must start with letter, >> -# except for downstream extensions which must start with __RFQDN_. >> -# Dots are only valid in the downstream extension prefix. >> -valid_name = re.compile(r'^(__[a-zA-Z0-9.-]+_)?' >> - '[a-zA-Z][a-zA-Z0-9_-]*$') > > I'm assuming python concatenates r'' with '' in the obvious manner... > >> +# Names consist of letters, digits, -, and _, starting with a letter. >> +# An experimental name is prefixed with x-. A name of a downstream >> +# extension is prefixed with __RFQDN_. The latter prefix goes first. >> +valid_name = re.compile(r'(__[a-z0-9.-]+_)?' >> + r'(x-)?' >> + r'([a-z][a-z0-9_-]*)$', re.IGNORECASE) > > ...but like your explicit use of r'' r''. > > Splitting out special handling of r'(x-)?' does not change behavior, but > is not otherwise mentioned in your commit message. I suspect you did it > to make it easier to permit x-EVENT_NAME in later patches where upper is > handled differently from lower or camel,
Yes. > so I won't withhold R-b, but it > may be worth a tweak to the commit message. Probably. I'm failing at coming up with a concise text that isn't confusing. >> def check_defn_name_str(name, info, meta): >> - check_name_str(name, info, meta, permit_upper=True) >> + if meta == 'event': >> + check_name_upper(name, info, meta) >> + elif meta == 'command': >> + check_name_lower(name, info, meta, permit_upper=True) > > Why do commands need to permit upper? I guess just downstream FQDN > extensions? This is just so that the patch doesn't change behavior. PATCH 24 will flip it to False. > Otherwise the patch makes sense. > > Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> Thanks!
