Re: config language and 2.0

Yeah, I agree it's hard to not go too far.  But coming from a compiler 
company you begin to look at everything as a language.

Honestly, having gone through my first port/debug this weekend, I would say 
another feature would be a index listing file of the include files, paths, 
and the generated options would be nice.  I spent a lot of time figuring 
out just which include file was being used.

A second point is on items for 2.0.  I had to track down three places where 
the serial port got its baud rate reset.  I kept loosing debug 
messages.  How about some flags to test if a device is already initialized?

Jordan

At 07:54 AM 5/20/2003 -0600, ron minnich wrote:
> On Tue, 20 May 2003 [e-mail] wrote:
> > I may be going to far here, but what about the ability to define new
> > devices?  Or composite devices.
> >      define warpdisk
> >              cpu p3                  # Warp disk controller
> >              include vendor/warpdisk_driver.inc
> >      end
> >
> >      mainboard vendor/model
> >              cpu p5
> >              warpdisk
> >              ...config...
> >      end
> >
> > Also I don't know if the current structure allows options.
> >      superio vendor/model IDE2=0     # For setting #defines for this
> >
> > included device.
> >          warpdisk ID=0 MAXDISK=3
> >          warpdisk ID=1 MAXDISK=2
> >
> > Jordan
>
> well, at what point are we going overboard? but we'll look at it. It's an
> interesting idea.
>
> There was a reason I made the original language so dumb ... :=) Once you
> make it a real language too many things are possible :-)
>
> ron
>
> Linuxbios mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios