Yes, I didn't mean to imply that we need to create a libruby tester. As you said, what we really need is just a way to change Ruby's API while ensuring we don't break libruby functionality.
Brad -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of nathan binkert Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2009 7:54 PM To: M5 Developer List Subject: Re: [m5-dev] Merging > Of course, absolutely. > > I've been holding off sending them out for review because I fully expect they > will need to change after Derek checks in his changes. However, I understand > many are curious to see them and I would like to check them in before > Christmas, so I'll go ahead and send them out now for review. > > There are several near-term items listed below that these patches don't > cover, but still need to be addressed. There are probably even more that > what is listed. I'm hoping do complete the first 2-3 of these next week. We > need a way to test libruby before we can clean-up Ruby's System.hh API. > Maybe this task is better done by someone at Wisconsin? Instead of making an effort to create a libruby tester, we should either make libruby be a shim on top of the M5 ports interface, or even go a little further and export more of the ports interface into libruby/bochs. Nate _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
