On 10/05/11 at 11:48am, Anders Nygren wrote: > Eric > In case You are not already aware of it, I would like to point You to > my ABNF parser > generator, abnfc, (most RFCs are specified using ABNF)
I wasn't aware of it at all. Thats good to know. I probably will not go back and rewrite the existing stuff. However, I will absolutely keep it in mind for the future. > https://github.com/nygge/abnfc > > The documentation is nonexistent, but it was presented at EUC 2008 > > http://www.erlang.org/euc/08/1500Nygren2.pdf > > There has been some changes after that, so contact me if You have any > questions/problems. > > In general I am not sure it is a good idea to put all RFC parsers in one > erlang > application. Since after a while You may get a large number of unrelated > stuff. I am always on the fence about this. I am not a big fan of 1 erlang file OTP apps, though there is nothing intrinsically wrong with that. I try to group modules in some reasonable way. In this case, I think that the fact that this is a library application (ie static) implies that there is no system overhead in having all the RFCs there. Though as you say there maybe some conceptual overhead. > But on the other hand many RFCs imports parts of other RFCs so I do > not have any good ideas on how to structure it. Right now its just going be structured by name. for example each RFC implementation will be named erfc_<rfc number>.erl. For example, 8120 would be named erfc_8120.erl. etc. > > Maybe the best is just to make a big bag of parsers and let people pick the > ones > they need. That is exactly the current plan. :) Thanks Anders, your input is always rock solid. > > /Anders > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Eric Merritt <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello All, > > > > I have started an RFC parsing library in support of my latest > > endeavor. This seems like a target to put under erlware. I thought I > > would float the idea to the list. > > > > https://github.com/ericbmerritt/erfc_parsers > > > > I dont have a specific goal of implementing all RFCs but as I need > > them (RFC 821 should show up shortly) I will add them. > > > > What does everone think of putting them under erlware? > > > > Eric > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "erlware-dev" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/erlware-dev?hl=en. > > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "erlware-dev" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/erlware-dev?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "erlware-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/erlware-dev?hl=en.
