On Mon, 4 Sep 2000, Rodolphe Ortalo wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Sep 2000, Christoph Egger wrote:
> > To avoid mixing up DDL coming with LDDK and our DDL we are speaking about, we
> > should give it a new name.
> > I suggest DDL4KGI (Driver Development Language for KGI)
>
> I'd rather say 'HDL4KGI' (Hardware Description Language) or maybe RDL
> (Register Description Language) or even RBF ("Real" Bit Fields ;-).
>
> Anyway, before finding a name, maybe you would like to have a look at the
> kind of thing I'm thinking to.
>
> Attached to this mail is a file containing a description of some VGA
> registers in the fictious language I'd like to see available. This is just
> a tentative syntax (do not hesitate to propose modifications) but it
> should demonstrate the concept.
The syntax is very similar to PASCAL. The syntax is easy to learn for people,
who have ever learned pascal (like I did).
But for those people, who _never_ learned pascal, the syntax might be hard to
learn. Especially the ':=' -operator might be brain-dead at first for
non-pascal-programmers.
All GGI-guys are very well C-programmers (, aren't they? :)
Because of that fact, I would prefer to a more similar C-style syntax.
> >From such a description, I'd expect a (to-be-written) translator to
> generate C functions for easily accessing registers, so as to allow to
> write "SET_Vertical_Retrace_Start(0x23);" etc. without bothering to write
> carefully specific bits of the field in 2 or more registers.
>
>
> I send this example because I'd like to ask a question to all the past or
> future graphic chipset driver developpers that may be on the lists:
> Do you think the availability of such a description language would really
> ease driver development ?
Yep.
> Of course, my personal opinion is yes (or I would not have spoken of this
> in the first place), but I'd really like to hear of different point of
> views.
>
> Thanks for your feedback,
>
> Rodolphe
CU,
Christoph Egger
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
