From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jon Loeliger Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Add character literal parsing in bytestrings Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 07:41:57 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1308871239-32683-1-git-send-email-robotboy@chromium.org> <1308871239-32683-2-git-send-email-robotboy@chromium.org> <20110720134006.GJ6399@yookeroo.fritz.box> <20110721051903.GO6399@yookeroo.fritz.box> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-reply-to: <20110721051903.GO6399-787xzQ0H9iQXU02nzanrWNbf9cGiqdzd@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org To: David Gibson Cc: Anton Staaf , devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org > > Well, to be honest I'd love to have this syntax several years ago :). > > [...] > > Ok, here's what I suggest. For now, can you create a patch which > recognizes the character construct syntax in the lexer (including > escapes), and allows its use in cell context. That won't actually do > what you want, but it gets a fair chunk of the code in a testable, > upstreamable form without making syntax changes I'm uncomfortable > with. > > While we're getting that merged we can debate which/how to proceed > with either variable size cell syntax or allowing the character > literals in bytestring context. Is it worth investigating any of the work I did down this line several years ago? It's all still in the "test" branch if so. jdl