Hi,
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 at 04:16, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
> Dear Simon,
>
> In message
> you
> wrote:
> >
> > > > We need the space between the bootargs.
> > >
> > > Exactly like that, and for the case where you want to append something
> > > _without_ an extra space there's the .=3D operator
Dear Simon,
In message
you wrote:
>
> > > We need the space between the bootargs.
> >
> > Exactly like that, and for the case where you want to append something
> > _without_ an extra space there's the .=3D operator I also suggested.
>
> Do you have a link to the docs for that?
>
> Perhaps we
On 25/10/2021 17.18, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Rasmus,
>
> On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 at 01:06, Rasmus Villemoes
> wrote:
>> Exactly, there's really never any case where that would be sensible. But
>> I would probably go a bit further and simply restrict varnames to the
>> usual alphanumerics plus
Hi Rasmus,
On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 at 01:06, Rasmus Villemoes
wrote:
>
> On 24/10/2021 21.54, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Hi Rasmus,
> >
> > On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 00:41, Rasmus Villemoes
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 21/10/2021 18.03, Tom Rini wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 09:59:38AM -0600, Simon
Dear Tom,
In message <20211024164404.GQ3577824@bill-the-cat> you wrote:
>
> > It is a convenience tool, and it is OK if it has a few restrictions,
> > like for the character set of supported variable names.
> >
> > But:
> >
> > 1) These restrictions must be clearly documented, both in the
On 24/10/2021 21.54, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Rasmus,
>
> On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 00:41, Rasmus Villemoes
> wrote:
>>
>> On 21/10/2021 18.03, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 09:59:38AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Marek,
On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 at 07:28, Marek Behún wrote:
Hi Rasmus,
On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 00:41, Rasmus Villemoes
wrote:
>
> On 21/10/2021 18.03, Tom Rini wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 09:59:38AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> >> Hi Marek,
> >>
> >> On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 at 07:28, Marek Behún wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:25:37 +0200
>
On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 05:46:00PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Tom,
>
> In message <20211022144759.GG3577824@bill-the-cat> you wrote:
> >
> > > Any escape character is also a legal name character.
> >
> > I am struggling to have a non-meme reaction to this. Perhaps the best
> > step is
Dear Tom,
In message <20211022144759.GG3577824@bill-the-cat> you wrote:
>
> > Any escape character is also a legal name character.
>
> I am struggling to have a non-meme reaction to this. Perhaps the best
> step is just earlier on in the series note that variable names need to
> fit within the
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 10:06:55AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Simon,
>
> In message
> you
> wrote:
> >
> > > > i.e.
> > > > var+=value
> > > > appends value to var, while
> > > > var\+=value
> > > > sets variable with name "var+"
> >
> > My first preference is to disallow + at the
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 10:08:05AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Tom,
>
> In message <20211021160311.GC3577824@bill-the-cat> you wrote:
> >
> > How bad does it make the parser look if we allow trailing + in variable
> > names, by escaping them? It's seemingly the substantive objection at
>
Hello Wolfgang,
On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 10:06:55 +0200
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> For the '+=' case, there is no way to escape the '+', as all
> commonly used escapes are valid characters in the variable name,
> too.
We can define that backslash is to be also escaped if it is to be used
as variable
On 21/10/2021 18.03, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 09:59:38AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Marek,
>>
>> On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 at 07:28, Marek Behún wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:25:37 +0200
>>> Marek Behún wrote:
>>>
Hello,
On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:06:51 +0200
Dear Tom,
In message <20211021160311.GC3577824@bill-the-cat> you wrote:
>
> How bad does it make the parser look if we allow trailing + in variable
> names, by escaping them? It's seemingly the substantive objection at
> this point.
Any escape character is also a legal name character.
Best
Dear Simon,
In message
you wrote:
>
> > > i.e.
> > > var+=value
> > > appends value to var, while
> > > var\+=value
> > > sets variable with name "var+"
>
> My first preference is to disallow + at the end of an end var. Perhaps
> we can start printing a warning if people do it, for a few
Hi Tom,
On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 at 10:03, Tom Rini wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 09:59:38AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Hi Marek,
> >
> > On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 at 07:28, Marek Behún wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:25:37 +0200
> > > Marek Behún wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> >
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 09:59:38AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Marek,
>
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 at 07:28, Marek Behún wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:25:37 +0200
> > Marek Behún wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:06:51 +0200
> > > Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > >
> > >
Hi Marek,
On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 at 07:28, Marek Behún wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:25:37 +0200
> Marek Behún wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:06:51 +0200
> > Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> >
> > > I confirm that '+=' looks better. But '+=" is technically broken.
> >
> > a bit of
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 05:12:26PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Marek,
>
> In message <20211021152831.15524883@thinkpad> you wrote:
> >
> >
> > > I think =+ will confuse far more people than + as last character of var
>
> I still fail to see why '=+' could be confusing if properly
>
Dear Marek,
In message <20211021152831.15524883@thinkpad> you wrote:
>
>
> > I think =+ will confuse far more people than + as last character of var
I still fail to see why '=+' could be confusing if properly
documented to be the append operator.
I mean, it is not a new invention of mine.
On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:25:37 +0200
Marek Behún wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:06:51 +0200
> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
> > I confirm that '+=' looks better. But '+=" is technically broken.
>
> a bit of my opinion:
> I think =+ will confuse far more people than + as last character
Hello,
On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:06:51 +0200
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> I confirm that '+=' looks better. But '+=" is technically broken.
a bit of my opinion:
I think =+ will confuse far more people than + as last character of var
name working weirdly. But I also think that + should be supported as
Dear Tom,
In message <20211021122325.GX7964@bill-the-cat> you wrote:
>
> Do you have any other feedback on the entire rest of the series?
I already wrote that I support the concept, and the few nit I saw
have been fixed, I think. Except this unneeded breaking of backward
compatibility.
>
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 11:50:02AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Simon,
>
> In message
> <20211019164418.v9.3.Ie78bfbfca0d01d9cba501e127f446ec48e1f7afe@changeid> you
> wrote:
> > At present U-Boot environment variables, and thus scripts, are defined
> > by CONFIG_EXTRA_ENV_SETTINGS. It is
Dear Simon,
In message
<20211019164418.v9.3.Ie78bfbfca0d01d9cba501e127f446ec48e1f7afe@changeid> you
wrote:
> At present U-Boot environment variables, and thus scripts, are defined
> by CONFIG_EXTRA_ENV_SETTINGS. It is painful to add large amounts of text
> to this file and dealing with quoting
At present U-Boot environment variables, and thus scripts, are defined
by CONFIG_EXTRA_ENV_SETTINGS. It is painful to add large amounts of text
to this file and dealing with quoting and newlines is harder than it
should be. It would be better if we could just type the script into a
text file and
26 matches
Mail list logo
