On Saturday 25 November 2006 04:35, Hollis Blanchard wrote: > > I don't like it very much. My first draft was exactly like this. But, > > after some discussion in the IRC, I decided to revert my idea, because > > specifying so many parameters by hand really sucks. It is too > > error-prone. > > Bits are less error-prone?
Less typing is less error-prone. > How about this: > MB_START_TAGS() > MB_LOADADDR(0x1234) > MB_ENTRYADDR(0x1234) > MB_END_TAGS() How to abbreviate information does not matter. When one implements an OS, she must put the definition at somewhere anyway. Even if we provide a sample implementation, not all people won't use it, because there are various assemblers and compilers. For example, if our example is for GNU as, nasm users won't use it. So the spec must be simple. Okuji _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
