On Sun, Feb 09, 2003 at 02:14:19PM +0100, Jens-Uwe Morawski wrote:

> what are you doing here? Do you read the parameter as suffix and
> convert it with 'str' in a string?

I am working with strings only. If I have an option like "dx(1cm)",
somewhere there is an assignment ...dx=1cm, and if I have an option
like "treemode(U)", then somewhere I do ...treemode="U".
I am not using str in this case. For each option, I have a way to know
what is its expected type.

> But the question i had was to write a keyval package
> that implements an interface the users know or are familiar with.

I understand.

> nothing specific, but for example the treemode-thing you gave above;
> here treemode is a macro and i believe that it does more than
> assigning the parameter "U" to an internal variable. 

treemode is not really a macro, only the name of an option. There is a variable
corresponding to this option, but since it is local to a class, it has a name
such as Tree_treemode (I am simplifying, but that's the idea.) 
Actually, there is a default value, and then it can be overriden.

> So you have to rewrite many parts of metaobj. 

I am actually not sure of that. When I setup options or when I create an object,
I am parsing the options and making a number of assignments. That's basically it.
I think that the changes would be very much isolated.
It would be worth having a look, but I am a bit busy these days. I could 
take out of metaobj what has to be changed. There is very little, I think.

Denis
_______________________________________________
ntg-context mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context

Reply via email to