On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:30:45AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 07/29/2013 08:15 PM, jonsm...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:44 PM, David Gibson > > <da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote: > ... > >> I also think we should consider the option of having a simple and > >> straightforward schema language which handles, say, 80% of cases with > >> a fall back to C for the 20% of curly cases. That might actually be > >> simpler to work with in practice than a schema language which can > >> express absolutely anything, at the cost of being awkward for simple > >> cases or difficult to get your head around. > > > > Would C++ work? You can use operating overloading and templates to > > change the syntax into something that doesn't even resemble C any > > more. > > From my perspective, that's precisely why C++ should /not/ be used.
Amen. -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linvi...@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
