[Freeciv-Dev] Re: do you really want to work on the ~ (was: registry)

["rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <dbsmith@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Originally to: David Bryan Smith

  by provide.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5b5)
  with ESMTP id 6264708 for 
dbsmith@xxxxxxxxxxx; Wed, 05 Dec 2001 
15:53:15 -0500
Received: from pi (localhost [127.0.0.1])
        by pi.glockenspiel.complete.org (Postfix) 
with ESMTP
        id D6B953BA84; Wed,  5 Dec 2001 15:52:54 
-0500 (EST)
Received: with LISTAR (v1.0.0; list 
freeciv-dev); Wed, 05 Dec 2001 15:52:54 -0500 
(EST)
Delivered-To: 
virtual-freeciv.org-freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Received: from B205a.WH8.TU-Dresden.De 
(B205a.WH8.TU-Dresden.De [141.30.225.38])
        by pi.glockenspiel.complete.org (Postfix) 
with ESMTP id 0A4F03B853
        for <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed,  5 Dec 
2001 15:52:53 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from hawk@localhost)
        by B205a.WH8.TU-Dresden.De (8.11.0/8.11.0) 
id fB5Kqi516486;
        Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:52:44 +0100
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:52:44 +0100
From: Raimar Falke 
<hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Jules Bean <jules@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Petr Baudis <pasky@xxxxxxxxxxx>, 
freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: do you really want 
to work on the ~ (was: registry)
Message-ID: 


0011205215244.A16451@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
References: 
<E16BcSO-0000lK-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
<20011205170113.B19770@xxxxxxxxxx> 
<20011205192523.GN19852@xxxxxxxxxxx> 




11205203015.A11643@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: 





1205203015.A11643@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
from jules@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on Wed, Dec 05, 
2001 at 08:30:15PM +0000
X-Location: Dresden, Saxonia, Germany, 
Europe, Earth
X-archive-position: 5102
X-listar-version: Listar v1.0.0
Sender: freeciv-dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
Errors-To: freeciv-dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
X-original-sender: 
hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
X-list: freeciv-dev

On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 08:30:15PM +0000, 
Jules Bean wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 08:25:23PM +0100, 
Petr Baudis wrote:
> > I think we don't need XML at all. It at 
least looks much less readable and
> > comfortablee for me. I would be 
completely happy with C-like ruleset syntax -
> > i.e.:
> > 
> > building {
> >   id = "Airport";
> >   name = _("Airport");
> >   tech_req = "Radio";
> >   effect {
> >     type = "Unit_Veteran";
> >     range = "City";
> >     aff_unit = "Air";
> >   }
> >   effect {
> >     type = "Airlift";
> >     range = "City";
> >   }
> >   helptext = _("Blablabla\
> > blabla\n\nbla\
> > blah!");
> > }
> 
> That is neater.  XML is more verbose, 
certainly.
> 
> > It would be IMHO much cleaner than 
current one, and actually not so much
> > different. As a parser, I don't see 
anything particulary wrong on flex+bison.
> > Easy to use, portable, effecient.
> 
> I don't recommend it.  

> Writing your own parser is error-prone

Not with flex+bison.

> (unless
> you feel like the challenge). Much nicer to 
use a library which loads
> a format for you.  XML gives you that, and 
even some level of
> validation.
> 

> Alternatively, there may be standardised 
forms of the above. Doesn't
> the stuff libproplist uses look a bit like 
that?

I couldn't find an online docu in the first 
30 matches of google. This
doesn't speak for the library.

> OTOH, the thing about XMl is there exist 
nice editors for it. And nice 
> modes for popular editors. And it's easy to 
filter and
> transform. (Automatically generated 
beautful LaTeX format
> documentation from your ruleset file?)
> 
> I would argue that the *only* bad thing 
about XML is its excessive
> verboseness when viewed by hand.  It has 
technical and pragmatic
> advantages.

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 1 + 1 = 3, for large values of 1