Re: Canonical pushes upstart into user session - systemd developer complains
On 2012-12-01 10:16:54 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 02:18:04AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > At least for Perl, I can't see anything related to validation.
> That's because validating an ini file is trivially easy:
> the line is a comment line, which must start with a # after optional
> or it is a section header, where all data must be surrounded by ,
> or it is a key-value pair, where the key must be one word and be
> separated by the value by a =
> or it is invalid.
No, that's not sufficient. You may want relations between key-value
pair. For instance, if you have a line with a key "foo", then a line
with a key "bar" must also exist. Or a line with a key "number" must
have a value that is a number (more generally matching some regexp).
> There, validation.
> To validate an XML file, much more is involved, including checks of
> nested tags and escaped characters.
That's well-formedness (which also corresponds to validation with
an empty schema).
> > BTW, how do you do nested blocks in .ini files?
> You can't, and that's a feature. Instead, you have keys where the value
> is the name of another section (or possibly another ini file) containing
> the "nested" data.
So, there is a good reason to use XML (or some other format with
similar features) instead of ini: if one needs nested blocks or
may need them in the future.
Vincent Lefèvre <email@example.com> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)