From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jerry Van Baren <gvb.uboot@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 21:10:14 -0400
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] using a flat device tree to drive u-boot config
In-Reply-To: <488E053A.40205@freescale.com>
References: <A8499417-7011-4DFA-B453-B6C05EC6AEAB@kernel.crashing.org>	<f8328f7c0807281028u76d692bbt75f4ae953afc09ed@mail.gmail.com>	<488E02C7.5000106@freescale.com>	<f8328f7c0807281035rc9f6b69l3ab88980d0f6db5e@mail.gmail.com>
	<488E053A.40205@freescale.com>
Message-ID: <48950576.3050601@gmail.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

Scott Wood wrote:
> 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. :-)

NO, No, no!  In FORTH. :-P

> -Scott

gvb %;-)