Arghh Gmail! Dangit! This one was for the list.
cheers zenaan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Zenaan Harkness <z...@freedbms.net> Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 01:03:16 +1000 Subject: Re: FWIW: script vs. configurtion file To: Steve Litt <sl...@troubleshooters.com> On 7/24/14, Steve Litt <sl...@troubleshooters.com> wrote: > On Wed, 23 Jul 2014 15:46:56 +0900 > Joel Rees <joel.r...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I suppose I'll get complaints about this being off-topic, > > Yeah you dirty dog :-) > >> but perhaps >> we can expose a disagreement on terminology without the clutter and >> heat of the discussion in which it came up. >> >> Words, when spoken, mean what the speaker meant. When heard, they >> mean what the listener thinks they mean. Communiction only occurs >> when there is some agreement between the two. >> >> Programming is a field of mathematics. Mathematically speaking, >> limiting a language to a declarative syntax does not mean that the >> language ceases to be a language. >> >> Trying to assert that configuration files which are limited to >> declarations are not scripts is most kindly viewed as an assertion >> that the configuration file syntax is simpler (for some definition of >> simple) than configuration files that are allowed a greater number of >> constructs (for example, conditions, loops, definitions, etc.). >> >> This is a subjective matter. One person's simple is not guaranteed to >> be every person's simple. >> >> A known consequence of limiting syntax to declarations is that certain >> kinds of complexity which can be exposed by a richer syntax end up >> being hidden by the limited syntax. >> >> The complexities do not actually disappear, they are just hidden, >> becoming implicit, buried in the definitions of the things being >> declared. > > And, it just may be that you want this hiding. How much power over the > program do you want to put in the hands of Joe Ordinary User? As a tech > support guy, how much time do you want to spend supporting the user's > config *program*? > > Although I spent 14 years making my living as a software developer, > there are times when I don't want the freedom to do absolutely > anything. This is why I switched away from Perl: I needed some > limitations. ... > I'm a huge fan of Yaml for config files. You can express almost any > data situation that way. ACK! > If you like Yaml but want true programmability, Lua would > be pretty good, because you can do with Lua > tables pretty much anything you could do with Yaml, but you can also > write procedural or functional code to go along with that data. The > same could be said with Python dictionaries. Thanks for your tidbits re Lua, sounds like something to add to my bucket list :) > Shame on you for being OT! But for guys like me, who regularly write > programs so their Linux machine can efficiently run their businesses, > your post is an excellent and thought provoking resource. Thanks! ACK. And that's for your contributions too Steve, Zenaan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAOsGNSRhQPY2dQn0uM_Fk0tiP9XLdn5HR1tx3PxvOvL=qax...@mail.gmail.com
