Re: [PATCH] schemas: Add vim modeline

[Markus Armbruster]

Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> writes:

> On 31/07/20 19:53, John Snow wrote:
>> You have misunderstood me.
>> 
>> The critique I am relaying, but not raising, is that we already use a
>> custom JSON parser in two or more places, and so replacing one instance
>> of this with a new format actually complicates QEMU instead of
>> simplifies it.
>> 
>> I disagree with this concern on the premise that moving one non-standard
>> JSON usage to a standard usage is a win because it reduces the total
>> number of instances of proprietary formats.
>> 
>> Further, if we remove ALL instances of proprietary JSON, then we're back
>> to the same level of complexity internally, but with a reduced level of
>> complexity for outside observers.
>
> I think we should first build a consensus on using "real" JSON (plus
> Javascript comments) for the schema, which is easy, and then somebody
> can try his hands at removing the custom JSON parser.
>
> I wouldn't conflate the QMP and schema parsers.  For example, QMP does
> not need comments and schemas don't need either bigints or printf-style
> % interpolation.

Seconded.

QAPI schema syntax and the QMP syntax are totally separate.  Heck, the
whole *languages* are.  They happen to use vaguely similar concrete
syntax, a bit like C, Java and JavaScript do.  That's all.

Let's keep this thread focused on the QAPI schema language.