> 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.
IMO, supporting multiple output formats would be a tad bit overkill. Moreover, the issue of bringing in additional library dependencies to support multiple output format remains. Thanks, Christian On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Jonathan Rajotte <[email protected]> wrote: > 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
