On Nov 26, 2008, at 9:41 AM, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
Does that mean that you wish to have a tcl script (perhaps namedobsolete.tcl) that implements the obsolete syntax using the new syntax?I guess what I'm saying is that if someone submits such a patch, I'll certainly commit it.However, I don't suggest documenting or promoting it. Much. It is then anexample of what users can write themselves if they so wish to.That would provide a simple upgrade path for users while still excising the old syntax from the main code base. It is also clear to the end users thatthey are using an obsolete syntax.Are there other syntax changes that should be made before 1.0? If so, whatare they?Don't know. If we commit a first obsolete.tcl and there is interest in it,I'll certainly apply followup patches.Do you wish me to update the patch to include the obsolete.tcl idea?If you are willing to put this together then I'll certainly commit it. -- Øyvind Harboe http://www.zylin.com/zy1000.html ARM7 ARM9 XScale Cortex JTAG debugger and flash programmer
Where does this leave the original patch to remove obsolete syntax then? -- Rick Altherr [EMAIL PROTECTED]"He said he hadn't had a byte in three days. I had a short, so I split it with him."
-- Unsigned
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development