openstack team mailing list archive

[Monsyne Dragon <mdragon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Oct 26, 2011, at 10:48 AM, Kevin L. Mitchell wrote:

> On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 15:30 -0700, Joseph Heck wrote:
>> It sounds like even though most of us hate WADL, it's what we're
>> expending effort after to make a consolidated API set. So unless Nati
>> and Ravi want to switch to using Swagger (or something else), WADL is
>> the direction we're heading. I totally agree with Daryl that reading
>> it is a PITA, and am finding (from my part) that the only definitive
>> way to know about writing the docs and documenting the authoritative
>> API is to read the underlying code. (which is what I suspect Nati
>> likely did with the pull request that adds in WADL for the
>> Nova/OpenCompute extension API)
> 
> I wonder if it would be possible to generate much of the WADL from
> introspecting the code itself...surely the URL structure itself can be
> extracted from the paste setup, and the XML templates code I recently
> contributed could easily be traversed to provide at least a basic
> description of the output.  That could at least provide a starting point
> for generating WADLs...
> 
> (Of course, I propose this, having little idea of what actually goes in
> a WADL, but still... ;)

I've worked with WADL and WSDL before, and yes, it is indeed possible to generate the WADL by introspecting code. (with a few decorators/annotations assisting)
This is what Sandy Walsh is suggesting, and I highly, highly recommend this approach.  Otherwise you have to either generate code from an external WADL, which makes the code a mess, or keep the WADL in sync with the code manually (bleh).  The big advantage of generating WADLs from the code is that you then get a machine-readable description of what the *code* thinks the interface is, not what you *hope* the interface is. That way,  if you look at the generated WADL, and if the interface isn't what it *should* be (as in "Where did THAT resource come from, and where did the foobar param on that GET method go?"), you know you have a bug to fix. 

--
	Monsyne M. Dragon
	OpenStack/Nova 
	cell 210-441-0965
	work x 5014190