ConfigurationImprovements

Configuration file improvements

Arguments in macros

Macros could be made more function-like, so that they can accept arguments (in a similar manner that C allows macros with arguments). That would make the config files a lot cleaner in some sophisticated lookup and condition scenarios. Today, to make a argumented macro, I must make two macros, eg.:

MACRO_START = ${some lookup or something: /base/path/to/
MACRO_END = .db}

And the macro usage looks like:

MACRO_STARTdirectory/filenameMACRO_END

That's both hard to read and unconvenient to use (what if one wants the filename to appear twice in the macro?).

I'd suggest something like:

MACRO(x,y) = ${some lookup: /base/path/to/%x%/%y%.db}

With usage scenario:

MACRO(directory,filename)

That makes variables inside '%' (just a suggestion, sure they need to be escapable) behave in a special manner. It can easily be assumed that macro definitions and usage could not contain spaces inside these parentheses, to make parsing easier and less human error prone. To avoid confusion, macro definitions can be made more explicit. Again, taking C as an example, I'd go for:

.define MACRO something

Exim already is using ".if" etc. as preprocessing keywords.

Replace with Lua

I think we should consider the idea of replacing the complete configuration set with an embeddable scripting language used for both control and configuration. This would allow greater flexibility and probably improve consistancy (if done right). It is a major change, but I think worth investigating.

A good potential candidate for this would be Lua which is used as a configuration language. However a lot of preparatory investigation work would need doing. -- NigelMetheringham_ `DateTime(2007-02-27T13:35:13Z)`_