On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Eric Merritt <[email protected]> wrote: > 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. >
Thinking a little more about this, it is not so bad, since with reltool it is fairly simple to specify which modules to include from an application when creating a release. /Anders > >> 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. > > -- 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.
