Hello ksi,
ksi@koi8.net wrote:
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear ksi@koi8.net,
In message Pine.LNX.4.64ksi.0903121203270.8874@home-gw.koi8.net you wrote:
[...]
It was _NOT_ a discussion. It ceased to be one after a couple of days. You guys somehow got scared by innocent CPP tricks and then discussion degraded to junk. I didn't even tell that there _IS_ a whole bunch of very similar CPP-generated code already in U-Boot source. Look at e.g. drivers/pci/pci.c or drivers/pci/pci_indirect.c...
Well, I think you can blame both sides. You also provided your share of unproven claims, ignoring other opinions, etc.
No, I gave a logical analysis. I did not build several versions and compared
That was the problem, you didn;t tried my code ... you just trusted your theory.
them but it is not required. It is only needed if there is no logic or theoretical solution and result can not be calculated. There is nothing more practical than a good theory.
Maybe there are more than one good theory?
Numerous experiments in the dark is not an effective way to do things. It
I really don;t want to start this discussion here again, before v2009.03 is released, but we did such an analysis, and I posted patches for example how we can do the bitbang driver in another way. You just ignored it. If you did a analysis of the code I posted, you would have seen that for the bitbang driver our sourcecode changes were minimal, and resulting codesize is smaller than in your approach. But please, starting with this discussion when code is public ...
bye Heiko