From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E1051FF15C for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2025 14:03:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0477BB6FC; Wed, 5 Feb 2025 14:03:58 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2025 14:03:55 +0100 From: Wolfgang Bumiller To: Stefan Hanreich Message-ID: References: <20250204131449.125443-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250204131449.125443-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.084 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [schema2rust.pm] Subject: Re: [pdm-devel] [PATCH proxmox-api-types 1/1] generator: support methods with no parameters X-BeenThere: pdm-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Datacenter Manager development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox Datacenter Manager development discussion Cc: pdm-devel@lists.proxmox.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pdm-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pdm-devel" On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 02:14:49PM +0100, Stefan Hanreich wrote: > Some methods (e.g. 'PUT cluster/sdn') do not take any input > parameters. Support those methods by generating them with unit type as > type for the input parameters. > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Hanreich > --- > pve-api-types/generator-lib/Schema2Rust.pm | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/pve-api-types/generator-lib/Schema2Rust.pm b/pve-api-types/generator-lib/Schema2Rust.pm > index 068517e..554341d 100644 > --- a/pve-api-types/generator-lib/Schema2Rust.pm > +++ b/pve-api-types/generator-lib/Schema2Rust.pm > @@ -535,7 +535,8 @@ my sub print_method_with_body : prototype($$$$$) { > my ($arg, $def) = @$url_arg; > print {$out} " $arg: $def->{type},\n"; > } > - print {$out} " params: $def->{input_type},\n"; > + my $input = $def->{input_type} // '()'; > + print {$out} " params: $input,\n"; This would produce an explicit parameter of type `()` - why not just drop `params` when we have none? > my $output = $def->{output_type} // '()'; > print {$out} ") -> Result<$output, Error> {\n"; > if ($trait) { > -- > 2.39.5 _______________________________________________ pdm-devel mailing list pdm-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdm-devel