That's what we call a DTO
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Christophe Demarey <
christophe.dema...@inria.fr> wrote:
> +1
> It is exactly what i've done with Cargo. Define your own specific object
> for serialization / deserialization. It is the simplest way to have a human
> readable conf file (e.g. urls, pathes default serialization is not what you
> expect)
>
> Christophe
> ----- Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> a écrit :
> > STON cannot be used to write partial, manual output because it needs to
> see the full object graph (like FUEL does).
> >
> > If I would want to use STON for prettier looking config files, I would
> make an object just for that external representation, converting it where
> necessary to better internal objects (like from String to FileReference).
> >
> > > On 5 Jun 2017, at 08:58, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.s...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Sven I know what Ston is :)
> > >
> > > Now Pillar dev used Ston as input and it works. Then with some hooks
> they let the user convert the strings
> > > into specific objects and this is ok.
> > > Now I want to add export in Ston and for configurations I need to
> control for the application and not as a ston object the value saved.
> > > For example a file reference should not be just a file reference in
> Ston but
> > > a string relative the the baseDirectory of the configuration.
> > >
> > > So I thought that I can build a hook and control the call to Ston
> (convert the object before to the correct values) and export.
> > > It should be working now doing this I found myself redoing the output
> of Ston.
> > > So I will do it. Then I thought that may be I could reuse this logic.
> > >
> > > Stef
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 11:49 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu>
> wrote:
> > > Stef,
> > >
> > > STON is like FUEL, it can write any object to a stream and read it
> back. Although you can customise how this is done, only one way of doing so
> is supported (i.e. you cannot change the format for each application).
> > >
> > > People have used STON for various applications now, including for
> configuration stuff (because it is a textual format that is easy to read).
> > >
> > > I would suggest you just try to see what your config looks like once
> you have the objects in Pharo.
> > >
> > > STON toStringPretty: myConfig.
> > >
> > > Then we can see how to tune the representation.
> > >
> > > Sven
> > >
> > > > On 4 Jun 2017, at 22:58, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.s...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi sven
> > > >
> > > > I'm working on a new configuration frameworks similar to the one use
> pillar.conf.
> > > >
> > > > So basically I have
> > > >
> > > > ston := '{
> > > > "newLine":#unix,
> > > > "separateOutputFiles":true
> > > > }'.
> > > > and I want to recreate it.
> > > >
> > > > So I did
> > > >
> > > > Object >> toConfigurationString
> > > >
> > > > ^ STON toString: self
> > > >
> > > > SimpleConfiguration >> exportStream
> > > >
> > > > ^ String streamContents: [ :str |
> > > > str << '{' .
> > > > self propertiesKeysAndValuesDo: [ :key :value|
> > > > str << key toConfigurationString.
> > > > str << ':'.
> > > > str << value toConfigurationString.
> > > > str << ','.
> > > > str lf.
> > > > ].
> > > > str << '}'.
> > > > str contents
> > > > ]
> > > >
> > > > The idea is that for special configuration values people should be
> able to define
> > > > how to go from the object to configuration.
> > > > For example for some FileReference I want to have just the path up
> to the baseDirectory.
> > > >
> > > > Now I wonder if I could not better reuse ston.
> > > > I saw the stonOn:
> > > > but I did not look further because I was wondering how the writer
> where passed.
> > > >
> > > > Any feedback is welcome.
> > > >
> > > > Stef (now bed time).
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
--
Guille Polito
Research Engineer
French National Center for Scientific Research - *http://www.cnrs.fr*
<http://www.cnrs.fr>
*Web:* *http://guillep.github.io* <http://guillep.github.io>
*Phone: *+33 06 52 70 66 13
