[OpenSIPS-Devel] [ opensips-Patches-3513177 ] Substitutions in configuration file

[Nick Altmann]

Some things, such defines and substitutions, would be comfortable
inside opensips.
Why don't you use m4 inside C code, but use defines? Don't it stretch C sources?

And another question. Why includes support was applied to opensips? It
also can be done by m4.
It's useful to have a few ways to do something, convenient to each
opensips user.
If m4 is better for you, it doesn't mean that it's better for me.

--
Nick


2012/4/2 Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <saul at ag-projects.com>:
> Hi Rudy,
>
> On Mar 30, 2012, at 9:00 PM, Rudy wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Not that I particularly support the addition of "substitutions"
>> inside the current config parser, but one thing I have wanted myself
>> is something similar to defines. Flipping the question to Saul,
>> assuming we are all familiar with m4, what kind of parser additions
>> would you need to completely omit m4 from your current configurations?
>> This seems to be like an opportunity to brainstorm some new ideas, not
>> only for 1.x branch, but possibly for 2.0 configuration files.
>>
>
> IMHO, there is no need for creating a new programming language for OpenSIPS configuration. An existing one can be embedded and used to write the config script, think Python or Lua.
>
> Why spend time in reinventing tools we already have?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
> AG Projects
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel