On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 10:26:18AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 07:43:41AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 11:36:51AM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>>>>> Also, had you considered rearranging and making them optional,
>>>>> for example if you do:
>>>>>
>>>>> val:l,filename:F,offset:i?,size:i?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that would mean you can do the fairly obvious:
>>>>>   pmemload addr "myfile"
>>>>>
>>>>> with the assumption that loads the whole file.
>>>>
>>>> This would deviate from pmemsave/memsave, but feels more natural.
>>>
>>> The different order or arguments in HMP is somewhat ugly.  Okay if it
>>> makes the command more pleasant to use.  Up to you and Dave to decide.
>>>
>>> If you decide to deviate, consider
>>>
>>>     filename:F,address:l,size:i?,offset:i?
>>
>> From what I understand we can't have optional arguments in the
>> middle. Would you prefer mandatory size/offset parameters in HMP
>> or optional parameters but inconsistent with pmemsave/memsave?
>
> If you guys decide you want consistency with memsave, that's fine with
> me.  If you decide you want to rearrange arguments for better usability,
> that's also fine.  I just wanted to throw in another rearrangement for
> you to consider.

Thanks for your suggestions. Then I'll go with
"val:l,size:l,offset:l,filename:F" for now. I'll send the revised
patch series soon.

Regards
Simon
-- 
+ privacy is necessary
+ using gnupg http://gnupg.org
+ public key id: 0x92FEFDB7E44C32F9