On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 11:11:39AM -0500, Christian Babeux wrote: > Hi Jonathan, > > > Multiples solutions come to mind: > > -XML > > -JSON > > -YAML > > -Custom syntax (like GDB Machine interface* as proposed by Alexandre > > Montplaisir) > > I would advocate for the use of XML for the machine interface. Two > reasons come to mind: > > 1 - The expression of hierarchy (session, events, etc.) is much easier with > XML. > > 2 - In a recent post [1], it was decided that the configuration load > and restore (for sessions) would also use XML. This will introduce a > new dependency on libxml. If we were to choose yet another format for > the machine interface, we would probably need to introduce another > dependency to some library.
Good point +1 for XML > > > Machine interface output would be generated only with --mi option and > > could contain additional information than regular output. > > Perhaps adding --xml option to the relevant command? This would be > similar to svn machine interface [2]. How about --machine-interface <output-type>? By default <output-type> would be the chosen format. This open opportunities for other MI type and have an unified syntax. --xml option is clear and efficient.We could add an option for each type (--json,--yaml) if needed. > > Thanks, > > Christian > > [1] - http://lists.lttng.org/pipermail/lttng-dev/2013-December/022068.html > [2] - http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.7/svn-book.html#svn.ref.svn.sw > > On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 9:42 PM, Jonathan Rajotte > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > After speaking with Michel Dagenais, Geneviève Bastien, folks over at > > EfficiOs > > and Ericsson, a machine interface for lttng-tool would be a nice feature > > to have. Olivier Cotte and me will be working on MI for the > > next few weeks. > > > > The main objective would be to reduce parsing complexity > > in control tools. > > ex:Regex used in TMF control service. > > (org.eclipse.linuxtools.internal.lttng2.ui.views.control.service.LTTngControlService.java) > > > > Multiples solutions come to mind: > > -XML > > -JSON > > -YAML > > -Custom syntax (like GDB Machine interface* as proposed by Alexandre > > Montplaisir) > > > > XML/JSON/YAML promote extensibility and ease of development for new tools > > dependant on lttng-tools by being established standards. > > On the other hand, they add dependencies to lttng-tools where a custom > > syntax > > would not. > > > > Machine interface output would be generated only with --mi option and > > could contain additional information than regular output. > > > > We are focusing on output right now but we may eventually add a 'mi' > > command for input if necessary. > > > > What do you think ? > > > > Thanks > > > > > > *https://sourceware.org/gdb/onlinedocs/gdb/GDB_002fMI.html > > > > -- > > Jonathan Rajotte Julien > > Chargé de laboratoire INF1995 > > Membre MD6 > > Polytechnique Montréal > > > > _______________________________________________ > > lttng-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev -- Jonathan Rajotte Juliana Chargé de laboratoire INF1995 Membre MD6 Polytechnique Montréal _______________________________________________ lttng-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
