Re: [core] ? WG adoption of draft-veillette-core-yang-cbor-mapping-00

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 09:00:29PM +0000, Michel Veillette wrote:
> Hi Juergen
> 
> The extract I have provided is from a publically available document, see:
> https://www.iab.org/wp-content/IAB-uploads/2016/03/ipso-paper.pdf
> 
> My remark about the LWM2M modeling language was just to highlight that such language don't necessary imply code generation.
>

YANG does not imply code generation either. A YANG module defines a
contract, and in the light of a protocol a programmatic interface.
There is nothing in YANG that requires code generation.

It just happens that people often tend to automate things if they find
themself repeatedly writing similar code. It is at the end a question
of how much data a device exposes and what kind of developers you are
dealing with and whether you have a product that is expected to evolve
over years or something designed to be sold and thrown away
afterwards. ;-)

/js

PS: I have just implemented a YANG data model 'manually' because I had
    reasons to not depend on tool chains (the target environment are
    OpenWrt type of devices). But still I took advantage of having
    YANG tools available to validate test cases so that I can be
    reasonably sure my manually written code is a good match of the
    contract.

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>