From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Vrabel Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/9] tools/libxc: Scripts for inspection/valdiation of legacy and new streams Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 13:08:59 +0100 Message-ID: <536A225B.1060508@citrix.com> References: <1398883012-28413-1-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> <1398883012-28413-5-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> <1399464201.13430.24.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1399464201.13430.24.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Campbell , Andrew Cooper Cc: Frediano Ziglio , Xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 07/05/14 13:03, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 19:36 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > > I suppose these are for debugging/inspecting rather than to be used in > practice? In which case I don't think there's any need for me to review > especially. It's primarily for validating that saved images comply with the spec and thus it does need to be easy to keep maintained. > My only thought is that the need to repeat all of the data types is a > bit unfortunate and risks bugs and/or deviation. I can well imagine you > don't want to invent up an IDL or anything, is there anything out there > which might suffice? SWIG seems like overkill. > http://code.google.com/p/ctypesgen/ perhaps? I think this is a valid concern. David