On Wednesday 15 October 2014 10:09:47 Rafael Roquetto wrote: > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 02:36:51PM +0200, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > On Wednesday 15 October 2014 08:39:27 Rafael Roquetto wrote: > > > No! Not everyone uses Creator or whatever tool. I strongly dislike the > > > idea > > > of having to depend on a specific toolset. What is productive to some > > > can > > > be counter-productive to others. We need to KISS and use a > > > human-readable > > > format that offers the possibility to be manually edited if desired. And > > > for that XML is a huge PITA IMHO. Please, please don't go down that > > > road. > > > > The only issue is that the more human-editable the source form is, the > > harder it is to write a parser and toolchain to configure. > > Of course, we need to find a compromise in between. In other words, KISS but > no simpler. I am not suggesting something based on natural language, > actually, I am just arguing against an approach which enforces the usage of > an specific tool/editor as an alternative for a better designed textual > format. Specially when it comes to settings or schemas. > > The suggested QTypedSettings class is an example of a human-editable source > form which is easy to read (*arguably* easier than condensed XML *IMHO*) > being at the same time tool agnostic (any editor will do) and > parser/compiler friendly.
I'm not sure you got my meaning. How is a config editor tool in Qt Creator going to read & write those files? How is the code generator going to read the QTypedSettings source header to genete the equivalent .cpp? -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
