From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,d3037f71d9d26da1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-12-17 09:16:13 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsmm00.sul.t-online.com!t-online.de!news.t-online.com!not-for-mail
From: Martin Krischik <krischik@users.sourceforge.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: sed and perl - yuck [Was Re: Preprocessor functionality
 equivalent ideas needed]
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 21:52:25 +0100
Organization: AdaCL
Message-ID: <1324276.yJNICJfKoU@linux1.krischik.com>
References: <Hpp3r9.6L0@news.boeing.com> <m3he08tko7.fsf@insalien.org>
 <1255206.8rsULcRV6F@linux1.krischik.com> <brlkaa$h1h$1@panorama.wcss.wroc.pl>
Reply-To: krischik@users.sourceforge.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-Trace: news.t-online.com 1071681239 00 1038 GO0VGEtOpqDCP9 031217 17:13:59
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@t-online.de
X-ID: XHVVSeZageDZydVTrcLoGUceg2aj2zx38E3uu8ICGiHhyVuw9EVOgl
User-Agent: KNode/0.7.2
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3508
Date: 2003-12-16T21:52:25+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Waldek Hebisch wrote:

> Martin Krischik (krischik@users.sourceforge.net) wrote:
> : Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> 
> : > Another approach could be to simulate a preprocessor with sed or perl
> : > scripts.
> 
> : Did that, hated it and wrote AdaCL. If you rather use Ada then perl and
> : find find sed cumbersome you should look at AdaCL.
> 
> : If you disagree: Write a sed line which inserst "OS." bevore every
> : CD_Recorder -  but only if it is not allready there.
> 
> Well, if you have unused chars (say ';' and '#') the task is easy:
> 
> s/CD_Recorder/;CD_Recorder/g
> s/OS\.;/OS.#/
> s/;CD_Recorder/OS.CD_Recorder/g
> s/[;#]//g
> 
> If all chars are used one have to quote first:
> 
> s/./:&/g
> s/:C:D:_:R:e:c:o:r:d:e:r/;::C:D:_:R:e:c:o:r:d:e:r/g
> s/:O:S:\.;:/:O:S:.;#/g
> s/;::C:D:_:R:e:c:o:r:d:e:r/:O:S:.:C:D:_:R:e:c:o:r:d:e:r/g
> s/;#:/:/g
> s/.\(.\)/\1/g

> I have not put them on sigle line for readability. 

Cool. But you do prove my point: sed is to compicated. Isn't Ada a lot
easier to read then sed:

AdaCL.SAR.Filter.List.Append (
    C    => Filters,
    Elem => AdaCL.SAR.Filter.Insert.Text.New_Object (
        SearchString  => "AdaCL.Trace",
        InsertString  => "..  ",
        Search_At     => AdaCL.SAR.Filter.Insert.First,
        Insert_At     => AdaCL.SAR.Filter.Insert.Before));

To much to type? With use and rename you could reduce it to:

Append (Flt, IT.New_Object ("AdaCL.Trace", "..  ", First, Before));

But we are Ada programers so we don't do that, do we.

> The above is
> slightly off-topic, but I think it ilustrates nicely that a sequence
> of simple steps can give result looking quite different then a single
> step. In that spirit Ada discourages preprocessors (since complexity
> grows quite a lot).

Yes true. However, in OS dependen programming you might have package which
is 90% the same and differ in 10%.

Still, I might give some of the ideas here are thought and maybe I get rid
of gnatprep.

With Regards

Martin

-- 
mailto://krischik@users.sourceforge.net
http://www.ada.krischik.com