On 05/27/2013 07:12 PM, Alex Rousskov wrote:
> On 05/27/2013 04:54 AM, Tsantilas Christos wrote:
>> On 05/26/2013 10:05 PM, Kinkie wrote:
>>>>> 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)
>>
>> Well, this is not a bad scheme :-)
>>
>> Just the file:/path/to/file a little easier to implement. But not
>> something important...
>
>
> I agree that file() is a good alternative. Amos (and others), do you
> have a preference between
>
> file:"/path/file"
>
> and
>
> file("/path/file")
>
>
> syntax?
>
About these two schemes I have a different suggestion.
Some opensource packages using the "file:/" or "db:/" for dynamic data.
I do not know if it make sense for squid but I am suggesting the
following scheme
1) Use the file("path") syntax for configuration file parsing
2) preserve the file:/ or db:/ etc for dynamic data. For example acls
values stored in bdb or sql server.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Alex.
>
>
