[Accepted] SDL 0023 - Update Mobile API to Include Mandatory Flag on Parameters about sdl_evolution HOT 7 CLOSED

I've run into several small issues (primarily with unit tests) which were caused by the mandatory field being omitted when it really should have been set to false. An example of this is the "GPSData" struct, which has optional parameters in the HMI_API, but not the MOBILE_API (due to omitting the field in each parameter).

Forcing this field to be included would fix those issues and prevent future issues of the same nature (so long as each parameter missing this field is reevaluated when this is implemented).

It seems to me that it would have been significantly clearer if the default value for mandatory was false in the first place. Optional parameters seem like the more likely case, and parameters being optional by default also seems like the more common convention.

I've been told that the reason that true was the original default value was that the mandatory parameter was added after the fact, meaning that optional parameters didn't exist in the protocol to start with. This might introduce complications if the default value were changed directly to false, but it seems counterintuitive to leave it as true.

In any case, I do not think that the change proposed would really affect the verbosity of the spec a great deal (most parameters seem to have the field already), and I believe it would increase the clarity of the spec in many places. As such, I believe this proposal should be accepted.

I am also of the opinion that if this proposal were to be accepted, it should be done to both the MOBILE_API and the HMI_API, and that this convention should be enforced by the InterfaceGenerator so that the field is not omitted in the future.

from sdl_evolution.

The proposal makes sense and has been a longstanding housekeeping task in the Mobile API. Till now, the accepted rule has been that if the mandatory flag was not specified, the parameter was mandatory by default. This proposal should remove the implicit rule and clarify the status for all parameters going forward.

from sdl_evolution.

My only concern is that this makes the spec considerably more verbose. I would have preferred to have language in the spec that defines that parameters are mandatory by default and only optional parameters are specified as such. All parameters that are mandatory would then not have the mandatory flag at all. That should be just as clear, but would be less verbose.

I believe this proposal should be rejected.

EDIT: Considering the comments below, I have altered my opinion. I would still like to see one or the other of mandatory be a default value and for this to be strictly enforced, but I agree that this proposal is better than the current alternative.

I believe this proposal should be accepted.

from sdl_evolution.

Agree to the proposal and the same should be applicable to HMI_API as well

from sdl_evolution.

The proposal is reasonable and I agree that the mandatory flag should be explicitly included for each parameter. In the past the omission of the flag has caused confusion among developers and team members.

from sdl_evolution.

Based on the comments left on this issue, the Steering Committee has accepted this proposal.

from sdl_evolution.

Issues entered:
Core
RPC

from sdl_evolution.