From: Rich M. <rd...@cf...> - 2003-01-22 20:01:45
|
At 12:37 PM -0800 1/22/03, Chris Mungall wrote: >very very nice! It should ease the pain considerably, though I still have to deal with CycL's semantics. The things I like about YACycl are that: * Going from Perl <-> YACycL <-> CycL is trivial. * I find YACycL easier to read than CycL (:-). >hmmmmmmm - possibly insane thought - can you put coderefs in there, and >add a basic interpreter for some mad perl/lisp hybrid? You certainly could; the question is whether you would want to. YAML is a nifty way of dealing with the syntactic and structural levels; the semantic level is up to you. In my configuration files, I'm embedding Perl extended regular expression components into field descriptions: - name: pid head: PID patt: '\s*(\d+)' <----- type: canonical integer attr: [ static, unique ] defn: 'process ID' note: 'The pid is recycled, eventually.' I plan to stack the "patt" elements up in the running script and use them to parse the output of a command (e.g., ps). The "attr" elements then tell my script how to handle the resulting data. A "static" value only needs to be collected once; a "unique" value can be used as a key. One of the Lisp's big wins is its regularity (read, lack of :-) syntax. This lets Lisp programmers build "little languages", at will. I see no problem with using YAML in the same way... -r -- email: rd...@cf...; phone: +1 650-873-7841 http://www.cfcl.com/rdm - my home page, resume, etc. http://www.cfcl.com/Meta - The FreeBSD Browser, Meta Project, etc. http://www.ptf.com/dossier - Prime Time Freeware's DOSSIER series http://www.ptf.com/tdc - Prime Time Freeware's Darwin Collection |