Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: October 2001:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Server Overhaul (was Re: Re: Split patch)
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Server Overhaul (was Re: Re: Split patch)

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Arien Malec <arien_malec@xxxxxxxxx>, Justin Moore <justin@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Freeciv Developers <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Server Overhaul (was Re: Re: Split patch)
From: Daniel L Speyer <dspeyer@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:29:27 -0400 (EDT)

On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Raimar Falke wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 05:26:36PM -0400, Daniel L Speyer wrote:
> > The syntax proposed here is extremely similar to what I implemented
> > (http://arch.freeciv.org/freeciv-dev-200110/msg00816.html).  I did support
> > use of '=' as whitespace (yes, "set=mincitydist 3\n" would be legitimate,
> > but so what?), though whitespace compression (i.e. use of " = " or even
> > "  ") is waiting for the next version (which will be along Real Soon
> > Now).  The only difference is I ommitted automatic name setting (also
> > intended for future addition) and I used braces in stead of
> > parenthesis.  Actually, it's quite possible to support both.
> > 
> > I guess I have a set of features to work on when I next have free
> > time.  Does my parser look generally acceptable (with the changes stated
> > here)?
> > 
> > I really don't know the server code, but it looks like setting up the
> > parser may be a large semi-independant task.  So, unless there's reason
> > otherwise, I'll keep working on that and hopefully the server can be made
> > ready to receive it simultaneously.
> 
> I think at the start of all this should be a fixed grammar with well
> understood semantics. 

The problem with that is that a semantics argument can go on
indefinately.  It seemed to me (and still seems) that the discussion has
mostly stabalized, with only small issues undecided and no progress being
made toward aggreement on those.  In my experience, this state is stable
-- and the best way to get past it is to make some arbitrary
decisions and to write some code.

> I also think that it may not be wise to support
> a lot of alternatives ( ()-vs{} for example ).

I don't have much of an opinion here.  Alternatives make learning easier
for new users, but limit future extensibility.  I guess I would lean
toward agreeing with you, but I don't feel strongly.  I guess I'll put off
parenthesi support in any case.

--Daniel Speyer
"Of course they understood the rhetoric, but they could taste the fruit."
  --from _Green_Days_in_Burundi_
> 
>       Raimar
> 
> -- 
>  email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>  "Using only the operating-system that came with your computer is just
>   like only playing the demo-disc that came with your CD-player."
> 
> 



[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]