[Asterisk-Dev] Dialplan syntax changes.. Option: work on a radically different design..

[Dave Weis]

On Wed, 18 May 2005 alex at pilosoft.com wrote:
> On Wed, 18 May 2005, Brian West wrote:
>>> What is the dialplan?  It's really a procedural language, it seems.
>>> Do we already have well defined syntax(es) that would fit?
>>> Sure we do -- and most of them stem from the syntax of C in one way
>>> or another.
>>> So, can it make sense to make the Dialplan look more like C?
> Finally someone who has enough sanity to recognize that line-based
> programming languages died away with ol' GWBASIC and FORTRAN-1945
>
> I'm for it with both hands.
> Now, let's discuss the BNF of the new language. Also, discuss whether we
> need gotos, etc, etc - and whether possibly adoption of another existing
> "domain specific language" would be preferable to rolling our own, writing
> parsers and syntax/semantic analyzer, variable/array/etc support code
> - which needs to be debugged etc. Very boring stuff.

I think we should go for a slightly higher layer of functionality when in 
the distributed tarball. It's silly that people are still rewriting call 
forward and extension macros. I would like to have one or two 
"personalities" shipped with * based on the dial plan syntax, whatever it 
ends up being.

With this users will get something closer to a predefined kit of parts 
when they want to build something instead of an entire hardware store.

dave

-- 
Dave Weis             "I believe there are more instances of the abridgment
djweis at sjdjweis.com   of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent
                       encroachments of those in power than by violent
                       and sudden usurpations."- James Madison