[PATCH wayland] Add "enum" attribute to "arg" elements
ppaalanen at gmail.com
Mon Apr 27 06:03:00 PDT 2015
On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 14:20:09 +0200
Auke Booij <auke at tulcod.com> wrote:
> On 21 Apr 2015 09:18, "Pekka Paalanen" <ppaalanen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Two things I came up with in the IRC discussion was that only <arg>
> > types of int an uint are eligible for enums, and only uint for
> > bitfields. I think wayland-scanner should enforce that.
> I just realised another aspect of this. Can a (non-bitfield) enum be used
> both as an int and a uint? So some *int* argument somewhere has enum="bla",
> and a *uint* argument somewhere else has enum="bla" as well. What about
> enums that list negative values, can they be used as uints?
> I feel that this would be extremely prone to bugs, and in fact I think this
> is a situation where semantic information of enum style arguments can help
> catch bugs in C code (which so far we haven't seen yet in this debate).
> Should this be enforced by the scanner? Or is there some crazy situation in
> which it makes sense?
I can't think of anything where using int in one place and uint in
another place for the same enum set would be sensible. It's a similar
convention to always using uint for bitfields.
An enum with negative values vs. uint is obviously a bug, except maybe
for the -1 shorthand for all bits set.
However, these are spec bugs. If we find them in interfaces that are
already stable... maybe they could be fixed, C shouldn't care. Would be
hard for strictly typed languages, again.
These could be warnings from wayland-scanner.
More information about the wayland-devel