On 28.11.2010 05:24, Hal Finkel wrote:
I think a library for configuration-file parsing would be quite useful. There are may use cases where an embedded scripting language is best, but I think there are also many for which a dedicated configuration-file-parsing library is superior. -Hal Hi, Hal!
If you want - see Configurator's page: http://opensource.dshevchenko.biz/configurator/. Unfortunately, full user's guide is not ready yet, but examples explain almost all. On 28.11.2010 12:07, Bjørn Roald wrote:
Both program options and serialization provide that to some degree. One thing - what library can do, and another thing - what it is intended. I adhere to the principle "One task - one library". That's why I like to use Boost-libraries. As far as I can see the documentation, Boost.Serialization is certainly not designed for work with a configuration file.
I think program options lacks some of the desired flexibility for structure, necessity and validation, but that could possibly be added rather than making an all new library which will be confusing me and others even more. Well, Bjørn, I think it's a question for Vladimir Prus, not for me. :-)
Some time ago I started to use Program_options, but later the possibility of a simple INI-like file was not enough for my programs. I had no purpose to create own solution, so I started looking for a ready free library for configuration file parsing (moreover, it should not be GPL-solution, because it needs me for commercial use). And since I could not find a library corresponding to the principles of simplicity (easy-to-learn and easy-to-use), I decided to create own library under MIT Licence. And when the library has been successful (imho), I decided to determine the interests in it there, in Boost. - Denis