On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 07:48 +0100, Øyvind Harboe wrote: > On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 3:04 AM, Zachary T Welch <z...@superlucidity.net> > wrote: > > Commands that do not need to use Jim should be registered as > > high-level command handlers. > > Why is that? > > Nb! "ls" *does* need to use jim to return a list of directory > names used by other jim commands.
Did you read my summary message? Quoting this thread's first message: """ If the command layer provides some wrappers for Jim's return handling mechanisms, then all handlers can be converted to use the high-level command mechanisms -- and Jim can be isolated therein. It's simple refactoring, but are there objections to doing this? """ We need command_return_list() and similar helpers, whereby the low-level language primitives are hidden away in the command layer. Once this is done, then we can add support for new languages, and upgrading Jim itself is no longer intractable as it is today. --Z _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
