Subject: Re: [boost] Library for configuration file parsing
From: Jeff Benshetler (jeff.benshetler_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-26 19:48:51
I've switched to using Python for configuration files about 6 years ago, and
stopped writing "little languages" of my own. There is a great deal of
flexibility and extensibility from using a general purpose language, and it
has a fully documented syntax with good error messages.
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 5:31 PM, Denis Shevchenko <for.dshevchenko_at_[hidden]
> On 27.11.2010 00:04, Stephen Nuchia wrote:
>> From: Denis Shevchenko [mailto:for.dshevchenko_at_[hidden]]
>>>> Is there any interest in a library for configuration file parsing?
>>> Having done this once, just before TCL was announced, I won't ever do it
>> again. Ousterhout's reasoning is, in my opinion, unassailable.
>> Configuration files might as well be written in a full-featured,
>> widely-understood embedded scripting language.
>> That would be Python now, right?
>> Unsubscribe& other changes:
> Hmm... Sorry, but I do not quite understand your idea... TCL, Python... I'm
> not familiar with script languages.
> I propose a C++-solution which seems to me a easy-to-use and flexible and
> which I use myself for all my Linux-daemons. And I suggested that if this
> solutionseems convenientto me, It may seem convenient for others developers.
> I'm just trying to determine the interest in it...
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk