On 6 May 2015 at 16:22, Antti Kantee <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 06/05/15 04:25, Wei Liu wrote:
>
>>   I'm a bit unhappy with "baremetal".  It's long and not very
>>>>
>>>>> descriptive.  At least we'll get rid of the extra "bmk" term, which
>>>>>> is good, but a better term for "baremetal" would be nice to invent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> How about just "metal" ?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> It's shorter, but not really better.  I was tossing around "hw" in my
>>>> head
>>>> earlier, which is even shorter, but it's still a bad name since the
>>>> platform is not only for hardware.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> How about not having a term for baremetal?  Just rumprun. That way,
>>> rumprun{posix, xen} appear as extension/specialization of the common
>>> case,
>>> baremetal.
>>>
>>>
>> I don't think baremetal is a more common case than posix and xen, just
>> as x86 is not more "common" than arm, mips, sparc etc.
>>
>
> If I understood Krishna correctly, he meant that baremetal is the lowest
> common denominator, while other platforms offer a more refined interface to
> the same underlying system.
>

Right. I meant that.


>
> The technical side of me likes that kind of "inheritance" thinking, but
> the side of me that is worried about keeping the work presentable to
> newcomers worries a bit.  "If you want to run on an embedded system, you
> just use the \"no platform\" platform" might be confusing.
>

There is still the "rumprun" string which is enough to indicate the generic
platform. Maybe generic? but it is only 2 chars shorter than baremetal.

--krishna



-- 
Programming is difficult business.
It should never be undertaken in ignorance.
--Douglas Crockford, "Javascript: The Good Parts"

Reply via email to