Re: [RFC 1/3] flow_compile: introduce textual flow rule compiler

[Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>]

On Wed, 6 May 2026 16:56:30 +0100
Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:

> On Wed, May 06, 2026 at 08:46:32AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 May 2026 09:06:22 +0100
> > Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> >   
> > > > 
> > > > Dependencies are limited to rte_ethdev and rte_net; no
> > > > librte_cmdline, no flex/bison, no platform-specific headers.
> > > > The grammar follows testpmd's syntax so familiar rules carry
> > > > over and is documented in the programmer's guide.
> > > >     
> > > Was there a particular reason to avoid using flex/bison here, or did their
> > > use just not make sense? In general I would prefer using code-generation
> > > tools where possible rather than maintaining (metaphorically) hand-written code.
> > > 
> > > /Bruce  
> > 
> > As long as we are willing to accept flex/bison as build dependency,
> > it would make sense to use it.  
> 
> Google search points to https://github.com/lexxmark/winflexbison as
> available ports for Windows, so I see no issue with making these build
> dependencies.
> 
> /Bruce

Right, I am pushing AI to use flex/bison.
Surprisingly it is resisting; showing a bit of emotional ownership to the code
which is both humorous, odd and scary.