Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    text
    copied!<p>Do not invent yet another rules language.</p> <p>Either use Python or use some other existing, already debugged and working language like BPEL.</p> <p>Just write your rules in Python, import them and execute them. Life is simpler, far easier to debug, and you've actually solved the actual log-reading problem without creating another problem.</p> <p>Imagine this scenario. Your program breaks. It's now either the rule parsing, the rule execution, or the rule itself. You must debug all three. If you wrote the rule in Python, it would be the rule, and that would be that.</p> <p>"I think it would be difficult to filter the Python down to the point where the user couldn't inadvertently do some crazy stuff with the rules that was not intended."</p> <p>This is largely the "I want to write a compiler" argument. </p> <p>1) You're the primary user. You'll write, debug and maintain the rules. Are there really armies of crazy programmers who will be doing crazy things? Really? If there is any potential crazy user, <em>talk to them</em>. Teach Them. Don't fight against them by inventing a new language (which you will then have to maintain and debug forever.)</p> <p>2) It's just log processing. There's no real cost to the <em>craziness</em>. No one is going to subvert the world economic system with faulty log handling. Don't make a small task with a few dozen lines of Python onto a 1000 line interpreter to interpret a few dozen lines of some rule language. Just write the few dozen lines of Python.</p> <p>Just write it in Python as quickly and clearly as you can and move on to the next project.</p>
 

Querying!

 
Guidance

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload