On 12/18/2010 10:15 PM, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
How about having target scripts export a proc as the default
behavior rather than just executing statements?
This would get rid of using (effectively global)variables as
a way to communicate with these scripts.
A proc also opens up for handling
How does this work in case we have multiple devices in one scan chain? does
the last included setup_target replace the previous one, or do we need
unique names?
What target scripts export that board scripts can use would have
to be defined by each individual target script as there is no
single
Øyvind Harboe wrote:
A board script should export a single procedure without arguments
with a name that's fixed by convention.
This sounds good to me, for starters!
//Peter
___
Openocd-development mailing list
Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
Øyvind Harboe wrote:
A board script should export a single procedure
without arguments
with a name that's fixed by convention.
Is there an advantage to that approach? After
all, a script file *is* essentially a single
procedure etc (nameless, but no never mind).
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 6:50 PM, David Brownell davi...@pacbell.net wrote:
Øyvind Harboe wrote:
A board script should export a single procedure
without arguments
with a name that's fixed by convention.
Is there an advantage to that approach? After
all, a script file *is* essentially a
--- On Sun, 12/19/10, Øyvind Harboe oyvind.har...@zylin.com wrote:
So you don't think there is a disadvantage to
using variables
to pass information around?
I never said that. Are you saying that one
goal is reducing usage of globals? That's
generally a good thing ... but since you had
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 7:56 PM, David Brownell davi...@pacbell.net wrote:
--- On Sun, 12/19/10, Øyvind Harboe oyvind.har...@zylin.com wrote:
So you don't think there is a disadvantage to
using variables
to pass information around?
I never said that. Are you saying that one
goal is
