Re: [WACKO] rc configurations in xml?

[Joel Rees <joel@alpsgiken.gr.jp>]

> Joel Rees wrote:
> > Would there be any particular interest or antipathy towards defining
> > an XML (or similar) tagged syntax for the rc scripts? Is the idea a
> > good one for the back burner, or better for the trash pile?
> 
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=100627555000007&r=1&w=2

Thanks for that. I hadn't thought to look in the tech list, but I guess
it is sort of _borderline_ tech. (But not really without some code to
discuss.)

I have to admit, thinking about a pure XML rc.conf makes me chuckle.
That's basically replacing sh with XML and a DTD and programming
extensions, and I hate programming in any of the XML variety of
programming languages except XSLT, and that only for documents. I also
tend to find myself somewhat persuaded by the reactionaries who keep
telling us to drop XML and go back to SGML (and, thus, Lisp :-P).

However, if I were to try to automate maintaining the rc.local as it is,
I'd want some tags to separate the script snippet for one daemon from
the script snippet for another. That kind of tag could be buried in
comments with no problem, and wouldn't even require the angle brackets
that get so cloying at times. Of course, it might even be more to the
point to enclose the snippets in function declarations.

Maybe I should quit thinking out loud and write some code, see if I can
come up with anything meaningful to talk about.

-- 
Joel Rees <joel@alpsgiken.gr.jp>