> Le mardi 29 mars 2005 à 17:52, Orton, Yves écrivait:
> >
> > I started working on a project like this but never got
> around to finishing
> > it. I called it "Generic Record Processing System" IE GRPS.
> The point being
> > that this isnt a facility related to parsing log files, its
> a facility
> > relating to processing any file of parsable records in a
> mechanical way.
>
> Then what do you think of Record::Processor?
Great. Although you might want to take a little bit of time to think about how you would subdivide that space. For instance i could imagine:
Record::Processor::Parser
Record::Processor::Writer
Record::Processor::Writer::XML
Record::Processor::Writer::xSV
Record::Processor::Writer::Packed
Record::Processor::Reader::XML
Record::Processor::Reader::xSV
Record::Processor::Reader::Packed
... Etc...
If the framework makes sense it should be fairly easy to extend it for new data representations, output formats and the like. For instance maybe I have some kind of specially encoded records that need to be preprocessed before your framework can be executed then it should be fairly easy to add a new subclass and have it DWIM.
Also, when i say these classes what im thinking is that they encapsulate the knowledge about how to convert a rule specification into _source_code_ im not thinking that they should have methods that are executed inside of the parse loop. IMO there shouldnt be ANY subroutines inside of the parse loop. That way the resulting parser is lean and mean and fast. No method lookup BS or subroutine call stack overhead.
Anyway, as i said i look forward to seeing your work. :-)
Yves
