search for: dtd2

...tural languages or different computer languages or programming languages or ??Do you mean natural languages? > 3) I believe it would keep the format flexibile enough for future > expansion (but again, Reid would know better here). Yes. It wouldn't be painless, but going from DTD1 -> DTD2 is much less painful than going from INI -> XML. That is, the ENTIRE format doesn't have to change, its just incrementally changing its document type definition within the XML format. > > Having configuration files that can be manipulated accurately is > important for things like...

...already has interfaces to XML. I bet Perl has a module to parse XML too. > > >>3) I believe it would keep the format flexibile enough for future >>expansion (but again, Reid would know better here). > > > Yes. It wouldn't be painless, but going from DTD1 -> DTD2 is much less > painful than going from INI -> XML. That is, the ENTIRE format doesn't > have to change, its just incrementally changing its document type > definition within the XML format. > > >>Having configuration files that can be manipulated accurately is >&gt...

Dear All, I thought I would chime in with some ideas and opinions: o Configuration Files If it isn't too much trouble, I think we should go with XML for the following reasons: 1) We wouldn't need to implement a parsing library. There are several XML parsing libraries available, and I'm guessing that they're available in several different programming languages (Reid, am I

LLVMers, Since there's been little feedback on the design document I sent out, some decisions are being made in order to progress the work. If you have strong feelings about any of these, voice them now! 1. Name = llvmcc 2. The config file format will resemble Microsoft .ini files (name=value in sections) 3. -O set of options will control what gets done and what kind of output is