Re: Re[4]: [GEN] Template Handler
Chris,
you wrote:
>
> My suggestion is to have a file for each MAIN category. One for DOS code,
> one for WIN code, one for LINUX code, on for GENERAL code, etc..
Ok, I think I like that idea, and will consider using it.
What I'm *currently* thinking would be like this:
Handler could be made to work with 3 basic types of template files:
1. "main" template files: tmplates.dos, .win, .lin, .eds, etc
(each file would hold multiple categories of templates, relevant to
the "platform"
indicated in the extent)
2. "small" template files, for personal use and user contributions to RDS
site,
abcd.Etp, abcd.Wtp, abcd.Ltp, abcd.Dtp(eDs database templates?);
the handler would save these, and could of course load & use them,
too.
(each file would be a separate category, either user defined or an
existing
category from original or updated distribution of templates? Or,
could use
Thomas' suggestion and allow different files to contain templates of
same
category. When user *creates* new category, all get written to same
file, but
when handler *read* files, can get templates of same category from
different
files?)
(problem exists with regard to users inadvertenly using same filename,
as well as
same template name for different templates, and different category
names for
essentially same category)
3. "update" or "new templates" files, "NewTplts.aa1" etc
(each file could contain mixture of templates in *new* categories,
and templates
in *existing* categories from original or updated distribution of
templates);
this file would be read in by user selecting "update", templates
would be put into
appropriate variable for immediate use and added to appropriate main
template
files, and after that the update file would be renamed something like
"BakTplts.aa1", so user could know in the future that they had already
updated
with it. Could also build a 'list of previous updates' into the
update selection, and
maybe an automatic check against "BakTplts.xxx" before an update
proceeds.
> The purpose of the seperate files is mostly for speed, once the template
> files get larger.
> Maybe make that optional, allowing the user to choose the name of the file
> to contain a specific category of templates.
I think my #2 would do that for a user's self-created templates?
> I wouldn't even restrict it to platform categories. IMHO, it would be very
> convienient to store the templates to a category file of a more
appropriate
> name.
#2 again? You could add as many templates as you want to a file/category of
your own creation.
> For myself I would certainly have a 'sequence operations' category file
for
> example.
YES! Well, not necesarly(?) as a *separate* file, but *certainly* as a
category! In fact, in the couple of sample templates I just sent to Robert,
'Sequence Manipulations' *is* a category :)
And one of the templates included comes from a suggestion for using &=
instead of append that you posted once, which I retrieved from my "code
samples" email folder & slightly corrected.
Any templates people can contribute for *that* category will be *greatly*
appreciated!
>
> Add an export/import option to the program to create templates user
> templates or add them to the main templates.
> When a file is exported, a unique id is written to file.
> When the file is imported, the templates it contains are added to the main
> template files, and the unique id is written to a database of id's.
>
I'm not *sure* I understand. Would this relate to a person creating a
template for their own use, and then wanting to save it in a special format
for upload for other users? If so, that would seem to separate "update" new
templates from "import" user created templates, which does seem to be a good
idea. In other words, "officially" updated templates might receive some
small "overview" (or checking for erroneous or malicious code (sigh!)), but
"imported" templates might not?
Of course, the handler already *can* save templates the user creates, to a
"small" file currently one file, one category; *adding* imported templates
to the (proposed) main template files is something I've considered, but I'm
not yet sure whether it is a good idea or not.
> You can expand on that, and add more options for exporting/importing only
> selected templates.
Yes, that would be a reasonable additional feature.
Thanks, now I got to *think* about it all!
>
> Chris
>
>
> > Thomas,
> >
> > I might use your suggestion, though there are a few problems with it.
> >
> > I already *do* have category designators in each file, but I had made
them
> > unique, that is, one category, one file; each file has a file name *and*
> an
> > interior "category" descriptor, and all templates in that file are of
that
> > category and all templates of that category are in that file. And the
> > handler *uses* them like that.
> >
> > I think you are suggesting that I retain the idea that a file of
templates
> > be all of the same category, but allow multiple files to have templates
> > belonging to the same category, specifically for the purpose of adding
new
> > templates for the user?
> >
> > That way, completely new categories of templates could be distributed
> simply
> > as "normal" template files (*.Etp or *.Wtp), recognized and utilized by
> the
> > handler automatically, and templates to be added to existing categories
> > could also just be distributed as "normal" template files, with the
> handler
> > using the internal "category" designator to put the templates into the
> > proper place in the internal variable and put their names into the
proper
> > combo box for selection by the user.
> >
> > That's certainly simple enough, if I've understood correctly what you
were
> > suggesting!
> >
> > I can think of these problems, though:
> > 1. there is a possibility/likelihood of duplicate filenames with
different
> > people submitting various template files, not sure exactly how to
handle
> > that;
> > 2. it ends up putting potentially lots of little files on peoples drives
> > instead of a smaller number of larger files. Of course, the user could
> > relatively easily manually combine files of identical categories into
one
> > file, but I'd hoped to make that kind of thing unnecessary. Or I could
> make
> > the handler discern when there are multiple files of the same category,
> and
> > ask the user if they want them combined into one file, maybe.
> > 3. and there's a kind of "general" problem of how would a user easily
> know
> > which templates are really new and which might they already have,
perhaps
> in
> > a file with a different name or something; I really want to make the
> process
> > of adding (& fixing buggy templates!) *very* easy for the user.
> >
> > But other than that it sounds like a good, simple idea which I should be
> > able to implement fairly easily (& that's a big plus too!).
> >
> > I'll probably give it a try, thanks!
> >
> > Dan
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Thomas Parslow (PatRat)" <patrat at rat-software.com>
> > To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 7:19 AM
> > Subject: Re[4]: [GEN] Template Handler
> >
> >
> > > > Thomas,
> > >
> > > > That sounded so easy, I had to think a while to see if there was
> > something
> > > > wrong with it; one thing is that some "updating" templates wouldn't
be
> > new
> > > > *files*, since individual template files are whole *categories* of
> > > > templates, containing potentially more than one template, so I'm
> trying
> > to
> > > > make sure I can do something which will *add* any such into their
> > > > appropriate already existing files.
> > >
> > > > But your suggestion does make me think I'll scrap what I've been
doing
> > in
> > > > terms of putting *both* new files of templates *and* new templates
> meant
> > to
> > > > go into existing files into the same "update" file; probably any new
> > > > files(categories) of templates can just be distributed essentially
as
> > you
> > > > said (I was just going to have them in the same folder as the
Handler,
> > not
> > > > sure if I need to put them into a subfolder), and reserve the
"update"
> > file
> > > > for templates which need to be put into existing template files.
> > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > > Dan
> > >
> > > How about having the name of the category in each file rather than
> > > relying on the filenames? Then a category could be made up of multiple
> > > files which are merged as they are loaded.
> > >
> > > Thomas Parslow (PatRat) ICQ #:26359483
> > > Rat Software
> > > http://www.rat-software.com/
> > > Please leave quoted text in place when replying
> >
> >
>
>
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
