| 1 |
Before using python as an example, I had actually played with the idea |
| 2 |
of using XML. Any thoughts on this? I know that compared to a plain text |
| 3 |
file both of these notions seem somewhat cumbersome, but there are a |
| 4 |
couple of arguments for using a more structured approach. One, |
| 5 |
programatically handling the data is easier. Using either python or XML |
| 6 |
(and a parser) allows named access rather positional access to the |
| 7 |
fields. It also makes the definition of "records" more clear and easier |
| 8 |
to understand for new developers (i.e. me). It wouldn't be too difficult |
| 9 |
to parse XML (even into a dictionary). |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
As far as GConf is concerned, I think that the base system should have |
| 12 |
as few dependencies as possible. Python is already required, and, in my |
| 13 |
opinion, with its XML capabilities (or just using dictionaries) I |
| 14 |
believe a solution along these lines would be preferable. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Zach. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Mikael Hallendal wrote: |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> mån 2001-12-03 klockan 17.48 skrev Daniel Robbins: |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
>>On Sun, Dec 02, 2001 at 05:06:53PM -0800, Zach Forrest wrote: |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
>>>It may, then, also make sense to give a little more structure to the |
| 27 |
>>>optimization settings. For example: |
| 28 |
>>> |
| 29 |
>>>optimization_var={ |
| 30 |
>>> "host":"i686", |
| 31 |
>>> "chost":"i686-pc-linux-gnu", |
| 32 |
>>> "cflags":"-mcpu=i686 -march=i686 -O3 -pipe", |
| 33 |
>>> "cxxflags":"-mcpu=i686 -march=i686 -O3 -pipe"} |
| 34 |
>>> |
| 35 |
>>It would make my life easier if we would use python-based configuration |
| 36 |
>>files. Right now, they're parsed. But being able to define dictionaries |
| 37 |
>>is really appealing to me right now :) |
| 38 |
>> |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> The problem with this is that it's harder to edit in a regular browser, |
| 41 |
> not much hard but still, somewhat harder. |
| 42 |
> Also, it's quite nice to be able to override with regular environment |
| 43 |
> variables. I guess this can be done no matter.. |
| 44 |
> |
| 45 |
> About using GConf, imho it's actually not a totally bad idea. It is |
| 46 |
> thought of as being for the entire system (will never happend though). |
| 47 |
> Currently it has some weird deps (like gnome-libs->gtk+->X11) which is |
| 48 |
> no good. |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
> It does not store it's configuration in a binary database, it's in |
| 51 |
> xml-files in /etc/gconf. Anyway, I'm more in favor of something that's |
| 52 |
> easily editable in a normal text editor. |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> Regards, |
| 55 |
> Mikael Hallendal |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> |
Archives