Subject: Re: proplib changes
To: None <freza@NetBSD.org>
From: YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp>
List: tech-kern
Date: 06/15/2007 11:43:36
> # YAMAMOTO Takashi 2007-06-09:
> > > o Teach the library to support multiple codec backends,
> > > these are selected at compile time.
> > > See common/lib/libprop/prop_codec.c
> > > common/lib/libprop/prop_xml.c
> > > common/lib/libprop/prop_scn.c
> >
> > i'm not sure if it's a good idea to guess the format by checking
> > only a single character.
> > isn't it better to make "SCN" have a little clearer signature so that
> > it can be detected more precisely?
>
> It was the simplest option that came to mind and works adequately...
> I'm afraid clearer signature would complicate SCN a bit -- I'd like
> to keep the syntax (and visual apperance) as simple as reasonably
> possible.
do you mean SCN will be an only special format which is allowed to have
this "loose" syntax?
otherwise, how proplib can distinguish two "loose" formats adequately?
> > > o Add a new codec (called "SCN") in addition to XML format.
> > > See common/lib/libprop/prop_scn.c
> > > [example follows below]
> >
> > > The format has been designed for low encoding overhead and relative
> > > human-friendliness.
> >
> > what's the intended usage of the new format?
>
> No particular purpose. I wanted to have an alternative that looks
> better to my eyes, and I wanted to have a way to easily add support
> for new formats. To me SCN is easier to read/write because it looks
> a bit like C and has minimal syntax.
>
> I think if we provide a choice of plist format, it will also help
> solve the "plists in /etc" question -- the user can just pick his
> favorite format and proplib hides the difference.
>
> -- Jachym
then it's only for userland version of proplib, right?
YAMAMOTO Takashi