Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] DT bindings as ABI [was: Do we havepeople interested in device tree janitoring / cleanup?]

[John W. Linville]

On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:30:45AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 07/29/2013 08:15 PM, jonsmirl@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:44 PM, David Gibson
> > <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ...
> >> I also think we should consider the option of having a simple and
> >> straightforward schema language which handles, say, 80% of cases with
> >> a fall back to C for the 20% of curly cases.  That might actually be
> >> simpler to work with in practice than a schema language which can
> >> express absolutely anything, at the cost of being awkward for simple
> >> cases or difficult to get your head around.
> > 
> > Would C++ work? You can use operating overloading and templates to
> > change the syntax into something that doesn't even resemble C any
> > more.
> 
> From my perspective, that's precisely why C++ should /not/ be used.

Amen.

-- 
John W. Linville		Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx			might be all we have.  Be ready.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/