On Sat, 4 Mar 2000, Moshe Zadka wrote: > On Sat, 4 Mar 2000, Greg Stein wrote: > > Write a whole new module. ConfigParser is for files that look like the > > above. > > Gotcha. > > One problem: two configurations modules might cause the classic "which > should I use?" confusion. Nah. They wouldn't *both* be called ConfigParser. And besides, I see the XML format more as a persistence mechanism rather than a configuration mechanism. I'd call the module something like "XMLPersist". > > <IMO> > > I find the above style much easier for *humans*, than an XML file, to > > specify options. XML is good for computers; not so good for humans. > > </IMO> > > Of course: what human could delimit his text with <tag> and </tag>? Feh. As a communciation mechanism, dropping in that stuff... it's easy. <appository>But</appository><comma/><noun>I</noun> <verb><tense>would<modifier>not</modifier></tense>want</verb> ... bleck. I wouldn't want to use XML for configuration stuff. It just gets ugly. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4