>> There would have to be some huge advantage or some >> robust way of getting retesting done. > > Actually... there's a very simple idea: heterogeneous language support.
To me that sounds like a disadvantage. I like the simplicity and confines of jim tcl. >> Your improved design can facilitate such a disaster so we should >> handle this carefully. > > Yeah, having lots of front-ends like GCC would be a total disaster. > Apache, LLVM, Eclipse: they'd be much better of without so much choice. > > No, wait... the other thing... yeah: the exact opposite of that. ;) That was a thoroughly unconvincing analogy. Why don't we maintain OpenOCD in multiple languages? Why should a user *have to* develop OpenOCD in C??? Right... a single source code is an advantage! :-) -- Øyvind Harboe US toll free 1-866-980-3434 / International +47 51 63 25 00 http://www.zylin.com/zy1000.html ARM7 ARM9 ARM11 XScale Cortex JTAG debugger and flash programmer _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
