public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tim Jansen <tim@tjansen.de>
To: Jesse Pollard <pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: /proc format (was Device Registry (DevReg) Patch 0.2.0)
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:40:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <01042522404901.00954@cookie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200104251937.OAA27702@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>
In-Reply-To: <200104251937.OAA27702@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>

On Wednesday 25 April 2001 21:37, you wrote:
> Personally, I think
>> 	proc_printf(fragment, "%d %d",get_portnum(usbdev), usbdev->maxchild);
> is shorter (and faster) to parse with
> 	fscanf(input,"%d %d",&usbdev,&maxchild);

Right, but what happens if you need to extend the format? For example 
somebody adds support for USB 2.0 to the kernel and you need to some new 
values. Then you would have the choice between changing the format and 
breaking applications or keeping the format and dont provide the additional 
information. 
With XML (or single-value-per-file) it is easy to tell application to ignore 
unknown tags (or files). When you just list values you will be damned sooner 
or later, unless you make up additional rules that say how apps should handle 
these cases. And then your approach is no longer simple, but possibly even 
more complicated

bye... 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2001-04-25 20:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-04-25 17:10 Device Registry (DevReg) Patch 0.2.0 Dan Kegel
2001-04-25 18:09 ` H. Peter Anvin
2001-04-25 18:55 ` /proc format (was Device Registry (DevReg) Patch 0.2.0) Tim Jansen
2001-04-25 19:19   ` Dan Kegel
2001-04-25 23:09     ` Tim Jansen
2001-04-25 19:37   ` Jesse Pollard
2001-04-25 20:08     ` Dan Kegel
2001-04-25 20:40     ` Tim Jansen [this message]
2001-04-25 21:16       ` Jesse Pollard
2001-04-25 21:50         ` J . A . Magallon
2001-04-25 21:58           ` Doug McNaught
2001-04-25 22:03             ` J . A . Magallon
2001-04-25 22:24               ` Marko Kreen
2001-04-25 22:42               ` Alexander Viro
2001-04-25 22:24             ` Mark Hahn
2001-04-26 14:06               ` Tim Jansen
2001-04-25 22:46         ` Tim Jansen
     [not found] <200104252056.PAA44995@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>
2001-04-25 21:10 ` Dan Kegel
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-04-26  1:09 Dan Kegel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=01042522404901.00954@cookie \
    --to=tim@tjansen.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox