Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/6] Implement ARM PL011 in Rust

["Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>]

Pierrick Bouvier <pierrick.bouvier@linaro.org> writes:

> On 6/10/24 13:29, Manos Pitsidianakis wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:37, Pierrick Bouvier <pierrick.bouvier@linaro.org> wrote:
>>> Hello Manos,
>>>
<snip>
>>> Excellent work, and thanks for posting this RFC!
>>>
>>> IMHO, having patches 2 and 5 splitted is a bit confusing, and exposing
>>> (temporarily) the generated.rs file in patches is not a good move.
>>> Any reason you kept it this way?
>> That was my first approach, I will rework it on the second version.
>> The
>> generated code should not exist in committed code at all.
>> It was initally tricky setting up the dependency orders correctly,
>> so I
>> first committed it and then made it a dependency.
>> 
>>>
>>> Maybe it could be better if build.rs file was *not* needed for new
>>> devices/folders, and could be abstracted as a detail of the python
>>> wrapper script instead of something that should be committed.
>> That'd mean you cannot work on the rust files with a LanguageServer,
>> you
>> cannot run cargo build or cargo check or cargo clippy, etc. That's why I
>> left the alternative choice of including a manually generated bindings
>> file (generated.rs.inc)
>> 
>
> Maybe I missed something, but it seems like it just checks/copies the
> generated.rs file where it's expected. Definitely something that could
> be done as part of the rust build.
>
> Having to run the build before getting completion does not seem to be
> a huge compromise.
>
<snip>

As long as the Language Server can kick in after a first build. Rust
definitely leans in to the concept of the tooling helping you out while
coding.

I think for the C LSPs compile_commands.json is generated during the
configure step but I could be wrong.

-- 
Alex Bennée
Virtualisation Tech Lead @ Linaro