From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 12:43:22 -0500
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] using a flat device tree to drive u-boot config
In-Reply-To: <f8328f7c0807281035rc9f6b69l3ab88980d0f6db5e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <A8499417-7011-4DFA-B453-B6C05EC6AEAB@kernel.crashing.org>	<f8328f7c0807281028u76d692bbt75f4ae953afc09ed@mail.gmail.com>	<488E02C7.5000106@freescale.com>
	<f8328f7c0807281035rc9f6b69l3ab88980d0f6db5e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <488E053A.40205@freescale.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Ben Warren wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com> wrote:
>> I find a device tree much easier to figure out than a tangled mess of header
>> files, #defines, and #ifdefs...
> 
> In many ways, yes.  But are you an average Joe or a Linux kernel propellerhead?

Is u-boot work normally done by average Joes, and does the average Joe 
really find the preprocessor mess more intuitive than a "propellerhead"?

While we're at it, let's re-write u-boot in Visual Basic. :-)

-Scott