On 27 February 2017 at 19:36, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27 February 2017 at 19:20, Dylan Baker <dy...@pnwbakers.com> wrote: >> Quoting Emil Velikov (2017-02-26 10:26:24) >>> On 24 February 2017 at 18:21, Dylan Baker <dy...@pnwbakers.com> wrote: >>> > There are a number of small style cleanups and simplifications in this >>> > series, >>> > but the main changes are: >>> > - use a mako template to generate the header and code rather than prints >>> > - be python 3.x ready (the goal isn't to write python 3 code, but to >>> > write code >>> > that is easy to port or hybridize) >>> > - generate the header and the code in one go >>> > >>> > I've put emphasis on the readability of the template rather than the >>> > readability >>> > of the output code, it's relatively easy to pipe the code through >>> > 'indent' to >>> > make it more readable. >>> > >>> > Notable changes in Version 2: >>> > - Pass XML file via an argument >>> > - add flag to control output directory >>> > - Attempt to update android makefiles >>> > >>> > Notable changes in Version 3: >>> > - Fix "do not edit" message to have proper file name >>> > - More Android.mk changes >>> >>> > - Don't write both files at the same time >>> > - Provide the file name to be written to as an argument >>> > >>> Not sure why you opted to rewrite this considering that we already >>> have such bugs in-tree and the fix was a 2-line change in the >>> makefile(s). Perhaps I should have made that clearer :-( >> >> Eric seemed to suggest that this approach was impossible in android >> makefiles. I >> can revert that change easily if that's not the case. >> >>> >>> That aside - tried to pull/test your series, but patchwork has gone >>> crazy (doesn't like git series?). Do you have a branch somewhere ? >> >> I can push a branch, just let me know whether I'm wrong about the android >> makefile issue first. >> > The issue in question is more often seen in the Android makefiles. > I've poked the guys a few times to actually use the generic make ones > that we use in Autoconf. > If they're don't have time/interest [it is hard to trigger after all] > I won't bother you with any of it. > Completely forgot - please ensure that the script fails early if the arguments are not provided. I.e. we need some "Required = True" in the parser.
Thanks Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
