Build-in XML support?

Build-in XML support?

[Ville Sundell]

Hi!
I know, this maybe is F.A.Q, but I ask it anyway (because I have not found it
in kernel mail-list, so don't shot me!)  :

How about build-in XML-support to kernel?

Good or bad?

It would be wery useful for config-files? 
Yes, XML-format is big, an need disk space (that tag system needs
space), but it is easy to understand and it is standard way to format
data.

(...and I have a draft for small XML-parser in C-language;) )

-Ville Sundell

Re: Build-in XML support?

[Chris Wedgwood]

On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 01:51:06PM +0300, Ville Sundell wrote:

> I know, this maybe is F.A.Q, but I ask it anyway (because I have not found it
> in kernel mail-list, so don't shot me!):

<bang>

> How about build-in XML-support to kernel?

What problem is this solving?

> Good or bad?

Utterly pointless

> It would be wery useful for config-files?

The kernel doesn't have config files, just knobs in proc/sysfs.

> (...and I have a draft for small XML-parser in C-language;) )

Maybe you can do this for Shillix?

Re: Build-in XML support?

[Michael Buesch]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1082 bytes --]

Quoting Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org>:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 01:51:06PM +0300, Ville Sundell wrote:
> 
> > I know, this maybe is F.A.Q, but I ask it anyway (because I have not found it
> > in kernel mail-list, so don't shot me!):
> 
> <bang>
> 
> > How about build-in XML-support to kernel?
> 
> What problem is this solving?
> 
> > Good or bad?
> 
> Utterly pointless
> 
> > It would be wery useful for config-files?
> 
> The kernel doesn't have config files, just knobs in proc/sysfs.
> 
> > (...and I have a draft for small XML-parser in C-language;) )

Search the archives.
There was a thread about this some time ago.
Tim Hockin talked about his XML parser there. I'm currently
using it (in a modified form) in some of my programs:

xmlparser.h:
http://websvn.kde.org/branches/pwmanager/1.2/pwmanager/pwmanager_dump/xmlparser.h?rev=416745&view=markup
xmlparser.c:
http://websvn.kde.org/branches/pwmanager/1.2/pwmanager/pwmanager_dump/xmlparser.c?rev=417577&view=markup

Sorry for the half-offtopic posting. :D

-- 
Greetings, Michael



[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: Build-in XML support?

[Chris Wedgwood]

On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 12:25:03AM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:

> Search the archives.
> There was a thread about this some time ago.

that doesn't make it a good idea

> Tim Hockin talked about his XML parser there.

> I'm currently using it (in a modified form) in some of my programs:

> xmlparser.h:
> http://websvn.kde.org/branches/pwmanager/1.2/pwmanager/pwmanager_dump/xmlparser.h?rev=416745&view=markup
> xmlparser.c:
> http://websvn.kde.org/branches/pwmanager/1.2/pwmanager/pwmanager_dump/xmlparser.c?rev=417577&view=markup

all this tells me is that some desktop application programmer wants to
put XML into the kernel

so far nobody has explain what problem(s) this solves or why it's a
good idea

Re: Build-in XML support?

[Michael Buesch]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 972 bytes --]

Quoting Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org>:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 12:25:03AM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> 
> > Search the archives.
> > There was a thread about this some time ago.
> 
> that doesn't make it a good idea

I did not say that. Indeed I say it's a bad idea.
And that was also the conclusion in the other thread I talked about.

I only gave this example here, because people often think
xml parsers are big with many lines of code. This one is only
about 500 lines. But still, please don't put such unneccessary
bloat into the kernel. ;)

> > xmlparser.h:
> > http://websvn.kde.org/branches/pwmanager/1.2/pwmanager/pwmanager_dump/xmlparser.h?rev=416745&view=markup
> > xmlparser.c:
> > http://websvn.kde.org/branches/pwmanager/1.2/pwmanager/pwmanager_dump/xmlparser.c?rev=417577&view=markup
> 
> all this tells me is that some desktop application programmer wants to
> put XML into the kernel

not me. ;)

-- 
Greetings, Michael



[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: Build-in XML support?

[Chris Wedgwood]

On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 01:04:54AM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:

> I did not say that. Indeed I say it's a bad idea.

I'm confused as to the purpose of your posting then.

Re: Build-in XML support?

[Ville Sundell]

Sorry guys!
I say it wrong way, I mean:
Other programs would like use build-in and "standard" linux XML-parser.

It would make standard way to read xml-files in Linux?
Advertise speech:
    No more 1 000 different XML readers, only one, and people can
make it better :D

Michael Buesch, that source you paste, it is good, it is better than mine! :)

Comments please!
-Ville Sundell

PS. Thanks to all, for previous comments!
PS2. Sorry my bad bad english:)

Re: Build-in XML support?

[Matti Aarnio]

On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 12:09:35PM +0300, Ville Sundell wrote:
> Sorry guys!
> I say it wrong way, I mean:
> Other programs would like use build-in and "standard" linux XML-parser.
> 
> It would make standard way to read xml-files in Linux?
> Advertise speech:
>     No more 1 000 different XML readers, only one, and people can
> make it better :D

And why should it be in KERNEL ?   You are writing in
Linux-Kernel -list about it, after all ?

Kernel sources do not carry things like glibc, on which all
applications do rely on rather heavily.  Why should there
be XML-support, which is not needed by all programs ?

> Michael Buesch, that source you paste, it is good, it is better than mine! :)
> 
> Comments please!
> -Ville Sundell

/Matti Aarnio

Re: Build-in XML support?

[Ken Moffat]

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Ville Sundell wrote:

> Sorry guys!
> I say it wrong way, I mean:
> Other programs would like use build-in and "standard" linux XML-parser.
>

 Applications should be using whatever the libraries available to them
provide.  This does *not* belong in the kernel.

> It would make standard way to read xml-files in Linux?
> Advertise speech:
>     No more 1 000 different XML readers, only one, and people can
> make it better :D
>

 Diversity is good.  Competition between projects often benefits the end
users.  If you want to write a better XML parsing library, or to assist
one of the existing projects, please do so (after you have identified
whatever shortcomings you see in the existing choices) - but in
userspace.  And in userspace you will find that many potential users of
an xml parser are kernel-agnostic - they run on linux 2.2 or 2.4 (which
are in maintenance mode), BSDs, and others.

Ken
-- 
 das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce