Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 09:25:53 +0000 From: David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Allan Jude <allanjude@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Massive libxo-zation that breaks everything Message-ID: <B727735C-8C3C-4DFE-A017-0EC6B0152BA5@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <54F42A82.1020308@freebsd.org> References: <54F31510.7050607@hot.ee> <54F34B6E.2040809@astrodoggroup.com> <CAG=rPVfcB1Fy_8mHq-t5Ay07yrzuSGthQ0ZcGzvp0XG9gSSzkg@mail.gmail.com> <54F35F29.4000603@astrodoggroup.com> <54F36431.30506@freebsd.org> <54F42A82.1020308@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2 Mar 2015, at 09:16, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> wrote: >=20 > if we develop a suitable post processor with pluggable grammars, we = save a lot of work. > given enough examples you could almost have automatically generated = grammars. This decoupled approach is problematic. A large part of the point of = libxo is to allow changing the human-readable output without breaking = tools that consume the output. Now I need to keep the tool that = consumes it and the tool that produces it in sync, so that's an extra = set of moving parts. When you throw jails with multiple versions of = world into the mix, it becomes a recipe for disaster. David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?B727735C-8C3C-4DFE-A017-0EC6B0152BA5>