Skip to content

tool: separate tree parsing and xml parsing - #588

Open
sfulham wants to merge 1 commit into
seL4:mainfrom
sfulham:main
Open

tool: separate tree parsing and xml parsing#588
sfulham wants to merge 1 commit into
seL4:mainfrom
sfulham:main

Conversation

@sfulham

@sfulham sfulham commented Aug 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Moves XML SDF specific parsing logic into parse_xml and node tree parsing into parse.

Separate XML specific parsing details into `parse_xml`,
so that `parse` can be reused

Signed-off-by: Charlotte Fulham <charlotte.fulham@anu.edu.au>
Comment thread tool/microkit/src/sdf.rs
}

pub fn parse(
xml_sdf: SystemDescriptionFile,

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

hm, I think I'd rather than this takes a &Path and constructs XmlSystemDescription internally. not much point exposing that in an external interface if it's pointless.

then can leave off the pub(crate) change.

Speaking of I should probably go through and audit what needs to be public vs not..

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My main thinking with this was that parse_xml uses it for check_no_text (which to be fair may not actually need it) and didn't really want to have to construct it twice if we don't have to, but ultimately it doesn't really matter either way.

@midnightveil midnightveil Aug 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nah, should be fine to construct again.

It's a struct with one member. The in-memory-layout will (almost certainly) be the same as the member itself.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants