Nico wrote:

The problems (as I see them) are:


- a samba style file, as Gerd suggested, is much more easy to write, read, parse, fix by hand and understand

It's not; only if you worked more with samba (or windows) than with XML. Otherwise it's pretty much the same.

- c++ doesn't always fit well with existing projects, and especially it creates dependencies to gcc versions
(upgrading g++ is still a nightmare )

Agreed. I chose C++ because I simply like it (it's like having both Java and C at once), but the code is not so much C++. You could transfer it to C with maybe a day work.



Personally I don't understand the passion for XML;
don't you believe that a structure like the one following (intended as an example, not as a proposal) is easier?


[source]
name=hotbird
type=SAT
diseqc_protocol=1.0
lnb=1
card=1

[mux]
name=rai
source=hotbird
frequency=11766
polarization=v


[programs] name=rai1 mux=rai vpid=160 apid=80 .....


If you want to parse this very clean you end up just with the same SAX like interface you would have with a XML solution.
Anyway, there just has to be an agreement what to use, then it doesn't matter that much what format (C-struct,XML,init...) you use. The good thing with XML is that you have tons of apps that you can use with your data (no, not just text editors).
I just offered my code because I thought VDR uses C++ anyway(?).


Niklas



--
Info:
To unsubscribe send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe linux-dvb" as 
subject.



Reply via email to