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-Thread: a07f3367d7,865c3d125a8dbc3b X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!newsfeed-fusi2.netcologne.de!195.14.215.230.MISMATCH!news.netcologne.de!newsfeed-hp2.netcologne.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Subject: Re: Howto read line from a stream Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de Organization: cbb software GmbH References: <83317a97-dae5-4c84-a1ac-88a87833cf3f@q14g2000vbn.googlegroups.com> <1a90e055-44a3-4d00-b4cd-64798c731a55@e24g2000vbe.googlegroups.com> <709e8a12-f967-43db-b76b-4852cf1db08b@v4g2000vba.googlegroups.com> <196d124vj6gin.16zf5y40t9tr$.dlg@40tude.net> <4a26d249$0$31865$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net> <4a26f4a3$0$32674$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net> <1x2tgzxiay4t3$.rvhjms1ggu3h.dlg@40tude.net> <4a2796d2$0$30234$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 12:23:42 +0200 Message-ID: <1unigz9o798hk$.y1vxsdvq2uwg.dlg@40tude.net> NNTP-Posting-Date: 04 Jun 2009 12:23:42 CEST NNTP-Posting-Host: 08f2b2bb.newsspool3.arcor-online.net X-Trace: DXC=^d[RH?Z1Hk]<<0iRN7DLEQMcF=Q^Z^V3X4Fo<]lROoRQ^YC2XCjHcbY@LK^@RkgR1CFlQ0oNKYZ X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:6225 Date: 2009-06-04T12:23:42+02:00 List-Id: On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 11:41:38 +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote: > Dmitry A. Kazakov schrieb: > >> The point is, either the configuration is trivial and you don't need any, >> or else it is non-trivial and then a representation of it as a tree does >> not work. > > What would be the reason that trees don't work? Because non-trivial configuration cannot be reasonably represented by a tree. BTW, Ada program as a configuration for some processor. Why do we use Ada instead of XML? After all any FSA can be represented by a tree. Go to Intel tell them that they are outdated with that "Itanic", they should go for a native-XML processor! > I notice that alternative formats have tree structure, such as > > Name.Space.This = 123 > Name.Space.That = foo > Another.Thing = bar > > Dot, almighty... > (Java properties files). What about a constraint that Name.Space.This cannot be 123 when Another.Thing is not bar? How about: Personal_Foto = ? Joint_Distribution_of_Possibilities_of_baz_by_Normal_Pressure = ? >> XML is rooted in dark ages of computing, > > The dark ages of configuration are not over, and they will > not be over as long as we are here; remember the > protocols being written in quality C? ;-) At least they were properly documented and didn't contain 2K keywords, 2 different languages and required three compilers to deal with, because one of the languages is a meta language describing another one. (This is a configuration protocol I have to deal with this protocol right now. The configuration of a device that yields 8 values is 993 lines long.) >> from the times when people didn't >> really understand that there is no data. Because data without behavior is >> noise. > > Data and behavior can have a *separate* representation > when moving between parts of a technical process. Data and behavior don't exist without each other. They cannot have separate representations. >> It does not add any value. > > Config data does not need to *add* value. Right, that is why I don't need config data. > Just *provide* values. Valid values. XML validation > is a start, and can be performed anywhere. XML validation does not validate the values. It validates *itself*. A totally useless thing, as I said. > Here in the chain XML can add value to some technical > production process. I don't see how XML can add a value to the process without knowing how the process functions and how to influence the process. XML is a "Ding an sich", it has no technical purpose. >> If input is connected, it cannot be outside my responsibility. > > Producing data can be an outside your responsibility. So? It is connected. Look, producing 220V for the wall outlet is not your responsibility. But when you put your fingers into it, you as a subscriber will have to deal with that unfortunate situation... > I'd expect input validation to be more likely successful > when data has been preprocessed. I expect that VGA pug does not fit to the wall outlet. You propose that all plugs were same, supplied with instructions for "preprocessing" of 220V AC into VGA signal. I am curios how to preprocess off-line something that exists on-line. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de