Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] dtc: Support character literals in bytestrings

On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 5:48 PM, David Gibson
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 11:37:51AM -0700, Anton Staaf wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:25 AM, David Gibson
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 11:30:42PM -0700, Anton Staaf wrote:

[snip]

quoted

quoted

I supposed modifying your suggestion, but combining with our existing
convention for "reserved words" we could do:

       prop = /uint8/ <0xab 0xcd>;

I don't love it, but it's about the best I've come up with yet.  And
in particular it's probably the variant I'd be least upset to carry
around as legacy if we come up with a better way in future.

Yes, I like this better than my suggestions of using !.  I wasn't sure
if the /.../ syntax was something that was going to be allowed in
property definitions.  One other option working from this could be:

property = /size/ 8 <0xab 0xcd>;

I quite like that idea.

OK, I can take a look at writing up a patch to add this.  Unless it
was something anyone else wanted to do.  :)

-Anton

quoted

It has the advantage of limiting the number of reserved words created.
 It could also be:

property = /type/ uint8 <0xab 0xcd>;

Not so fond of this one.  The "uint8" would have to be some new
lexical type - "identifed" probably, which we'd then have to look up.

quoted

Which would allow us to define new types for cell lists without adding
new syntax.  I'm not sure if this is too useful though because the
only types that I can think of that are not summed up by their size
are things like float and double...

Yeah, it's my feeling that the < > symtax should remain for integer
arrays.  If we need something for other types in future, we should
define new, distinct syntax for that when the time comes.

quoted

But it does have a nice look to
it in my opinion.  And I would assume that if the /type/ <typename>
was left off it would default to a uint32_t cell list.  So the
additional verbosity of having to indicate it's a different type and
what the type is will only be needed in a few instances.

Yes.

--
David Gibson                    | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au  | minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
                               | _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson