[PATCH v2] eng: Requirements counting shall start at zero

[Andrew Butterfield]

Hello Frank,

 I have a use case where the numbers will exceed 10 .

It's not for numbered requirements but numbered test-files.
These result from different scenarios generated by our SPIN models, as part of the qualification activity.

The files are generated (and numbered) automatically, so the constraints are somewhat different.

For the Events Manager, for example,  I'd expect the final number of generated test source files to exceed 10.
It is unlikely that we would reach 100, though.

Regards, Andrew

> On 11 Dec 2020, at 15:16, Frank Kühndel <frank.kuehndel at embedded-brains.de> wrote:
> 
> Hello Joel,
> 
> On 12/11/20 3:49 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 8:41 AM Frank Kuehndel
>> <frank.kuehndel at embedded-brains.de
>> <mailto:frank.kuehndel at embedded-brains.de>> wrote:
>> 
>>    From: Frank Kühndel <frank.kuehndel at embedded-brains.de
>>    <mailto:frank.kuehndel at embedded-brains.de>>
>> 
>>    ---
>>     eng/req/req-for-req.rst | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>     1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
>> 
>>    diff --git a/eng/req/req-for-req.rst b/eng/req/req-for-req.rst
>>    index 9225e95..dcc4c11 100644
>>    --- a/eng/req/req-for-req.rst
>>    +++ b/eng/req/req-for-req.rst
>>    @@ -308,6 +308,27 @@ spec:/classic/task/create-err-invname
>> 
>>         ...
>> 
>>    +If requirements or the YAML files which contain them are to be
>>    numbered,
>>    +the numbering shall start with 0. For example:
>> 
>>    +
>>    +.. code-block:: none
>>    +
>>    +    weak-alias-0.yml
>>    +    weak-alias-1.yml
>>    +
>>    +Smaller numbers shall be prefixed with 0 to the same count of digits
>>    +as the largest number. For example:
>> 
>> 
>> When one goes from 99 to 100 requirements and didn't anticipate having
>> that many, does this mean all the files will have to be renamed?
> 
> I can change the text to what Gedare Bloom suggested: "If we know the
> max count (N) ahead of time, ..."
> 
> Just from my experience with the requirements for the basedefs, when I
> create the requirements for an operation, I know the number I end up
> with before checking them in. The issue we discuss would only cause
> trouble if later more requirements for the same operation must be added.
> This is not totally unlikely but it means that one actually has 9 and
> then need a 10th one.
> 
>> 
>> Should we start with a minimum of three or four digits? What would drive
>> the number of requirements in a set? How large of a functional area will
>> a single numbered set contain?
>> 
>> I'm just wondering if it is simpler to just have 001 as a minimum.
> 
> I think that 99 requirements for a single operation are really out of
> scope. That will hopefully never ever happen. Even 9 is already a lot.
> Also it is rather advisable to adapt the names of the requirements to
> indicate the purpose. The numbering is more for the case that there are
> two or more requirements on the same topic (like on handling the same
> bad input argument).
> 
>  my-function-0
>  my-function-1
>  my-function-global-side-effect
>  my-function-bad-argument-x-error-handling
>  my-function-bad-argument-y-error-handling
>  my-function-called-in-wrong-state
> 
> My opinion is that defining whether we start counting with 0 or with 1
> makes sense. Everything else seems to me a bit like solving theoretical
> problems.
> 
>> 
>>    +
>>    +.. code-block:: none
>>    +
>>    +    alias-00.yml
>>    +    alias-01.yml
>>    +    alias-02.yml
>>    +    ...
>>    +    alias-09.yml
>>    +    alias-10.yml
>>    +    alias-11.yml
>>    +
>>     Conflict Free Requirements
>>     --------------------------
>> 
>>    -- 
>>    2.26.2
>> 
>>    _______________________________________________
>>    devel mailing list
>>    devel at rtems.org <mailto:devel at rtems.org>
>>    http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>    <http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel>
>> 
> 
> Greetings
> Frank
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at rtems.org
> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Butterfield     Tel: +353-1-896-2517     Fax: +353-1-677-2204
Lero at TCD, Head of Software Foundations & Verification Research Group
School of Computer Science and Statistics,
Room G.39, O'Reilly Institute, Trinity College, University of Dublin
                         http://www.scss.tcd.ie/Andrew.Butterfield/
--------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20201211/1f35ae37/attachment-0001.html>