Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] config-parse: create config parsing library

> Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> writes:
> > But I am not sure that I agree that this series is moving us in the
> > right direction necessarily. Or at least I am not convinced that
> > shipping the intermediate state is worth doing before we have callers
> > that could drop '#include "config.h"' for just the parser.
> > 
> > This feels like churn that does not yield a tangible pay-off, at least
> > in the sense that the refactoring and code movement delivers us
> > something that we can substantively use today.
> > 
> > I dunno.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Taylor
> 
> Thanks for calling this out. We do want our changes to be good for both
> the libification and the non-libification cases as much as possible. As
> it is, I do agree that since we won't have callers that can use the new
> parser header (I think the likeliest cause of having such a caller is
> if we have a "interpret-config" command, like "interpret-trailers"), we
> probably shouldn't merge this (at least, the last 2 patches).
> 
> I think patches 1-3 are still usable (they make some internals of config
> parsing less confusing) but I'm also OK if we hold off on them until
> we find a compelling use case that motivates refactoring on the config
> parser.