Il 17/07/2013 15:57, Laszlo Ersek ha scritto: >> > Not only that, but is this even the right representation? The fact that >> > you are requiring the receiver to further parse this string means you >> > probably represented it at the wrong level in JSON. That is, a JSON >> > string "1,2,4" requires post-processing to turn it into 3 processor ids, >> > while a JSON array [1, 2, 4] does not, so you should probably consider >> > '*cpus':['int'] as your preferred datatype. > opts-visitor can handle lists of simple scalar types. Ie. it can do > -numa node,nodeid=3,cpus=3-4,cpus=9-10. It can't save the parsing of > intervals (eg. 3-4).
Saving the parsing of intervals is not necessary for this use case. So if we can make it '*cpus':['int'], we should. But is it the opts-visitor "can handle" lists of integers, or does code have to be written? If the latter, can you whip up a prototype? Paolo > This is of course not to say that the interface should be limited by > what opts-visitor can do; just that opts-visitor may not be appropriate > for (or solve completely the needs of) very intricate options.
