On 3/2/15 2:53 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/2/15 5:25 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:

On 3/2/15 4:25 AM, David Chisnall wrote:
On 2 Mar 2015, at 09:16, Julian Elischer <jul...@freebsd.org> wrote:
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.
why? the jail has it own /usr/share?


I think the risk is exactly opposite. That the human readable output will change subtly with bugs in the xo implementation. and people will not update the two output paths in exactly the same way, leading bugs. I'm not going to fight on it, but I am uncomfortable with it.
So you mean that we're going to have to act like mature software devs and have regression tests (atf) and such? I welcome such a change.

You are increasing the complexity of every program you touch.
And its utility as well.  Worth it.


freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to