>> The only thing I would like to see differently implemented is the >> syntax used to include files: >> file(path) would be IMO easier to understand and less prone to >> confusion than the proposed syntax. > > OK. > But imagine in the future also the following syntax: > file:/path/file > system:/usr/local/squid/bin/my-squid-conf (to read from an executable > stdout configuration options) > http://hostname/cfgfile (to get from web page configuration) > > All the above can be implemented in the future...
Sure, I agree. file(/path/file) system(/some/executable) http_get(http://hostname/file) What I simply meant is that it is very customary for anyone who has ever dabbled in any programming language to see a pattern where name(...) is either a funciton invocation, or a macro call It's also a syntax that was never used in Squid, so it's not encumbered by legacy. Note: I'm not vetoing the syntax, just chiming in with a suggestion:I am sure that there are excellent reasons for doing it like you thought. -- /kinkie