* John Snow (js...@redhat.com) wrote: > > > On 1/24/20 9:38 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > Hi! :-) > > > > Well, not fighting for it to the death and I'm certainly not married to > > its exact syntax, but I use HMP all the time because it's convenient to > > use manually and QMP isn't. > > > > If you want to remove HMP, get us a decent QMP shell first. And ideally > > a way how to use it without manually configuring a QMP socket and > > starting up and connecting the shell to it with ten kilometers of > > command line options on both sides first. HMP is available by default, > > and so should its replacement be. > > This is partly why I am asking about what a "qmp-shell" should look like > to be usable, so we can sunset HMP once and for all. > > One idea for a qmp-shell is to implement some of the convenience syntax > in qmp-shell directly to give us some of the same shorthands, and that > logic lives in the shell now.
I wonder about generating a set of python bindings for the qmp commands, and generating wrappers for those, and having the qmp-shell be a python interpreter with all that loaded. That way it would be very easy to add extra sugar. However, I caution that too many people think that QMP has all the type of diagnostic stuff people want - it's just way too hard and beuracratic to add a simple diagnostic command to QMP, when you just want to add something to print some diagnostics out for your corner of qemu. Dave > --js > > -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
