On 06-08-16 10:39, Edward Bartolo wrote:
In the case of simple parsing requirements, I prefer to have the
program itself do the parsing instead of relying on an external
parser. This remove the extra dependency on the parser.
I would also like to comment on the text file format in which menus
and menu trees will be stored. If I were to code the project myself I
would opt to avoid using a nested format to mimic a tree structure.
Instead lines defining tree-nodes would be used as I described
earlier.
placement="main menu/sub-menu1/next-sub-menu1"
This neatly describes tree nodes without using a nested format. It
also allows menu items to be placed anywhere in the file which is an
advantage.
Such parser would "understand" the start of a menu definition by the
"placement=" string after which it should search for other fields as I
described earlier. A menu definition would be delimited by the next
"placement=" string.
What I am describing is simple but it can effectively be used to
define a menu tree that is saved in a human editable/readable format
not requiring any external parsers.
Requoting for ease of reference:
<<
placement="/path/to/menu/item/in/menu/tree"
name="my cool menu"
command="/path/to/command param1 param2 ..."
icon="/path/to/icon"
Edward
Back in the old MS-DOS days i made a menu with 26 choices from A to Z
per page. The file structure was a simple text file with at the [A]
"Description" command parameter. To have a submenu you had a [A]
"Description" line and [AA] "Description" command parameter line. Never
needed more then two layers but you could also have [AAA] or more.
Maybe i still have the original Turbo Pascal source somewhere.
Grtz.
Nick
_______________________________________________
Dng mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
