Re: Unresolved issues #2

> [...] Probably a reasonable convention would be to define the config 
> file format to be something like this:
> 
>         <comment that applies to the section>
>         [section]
>                 <comment that applies to the variable stands on
> 		 its own before the variable>
>                 variable [= value] <comment that applies to the
>         			    fact the variable is set to
>                                     this particular value starts
> 				    on the same line as the
>                                     "variable = value" thing>
> 
>  - when a variable is reset to another value, remove the
>    "value comment";
>  - when a variable disappears, remove "variable comment";
>  - when a section disappears, remove "section comment";
>  - otherwise leave the comment intact.
> 
> Then we could tell the user the rule is like above, and tell
> them to structure the file with comments that way, if they ever
> want to edit the file by hand.
> 
> Now if we wanted to do something like the above, I suspect that
> it would be easier and less error prone to first scan the config
> file, note what appears where, and do the processing in-core,
> and then write the results out, perhaps using data structures
> like these:
> 
>         struct config_section {
>             char *pre_comment;
>             char *name; /* e.g. "core" */
>             struct config_section *next; /* next section */
>             struct config_var *vars; /* pointer to the first one */
>         };
>         struct config_var {
>             char *pre_comment;
>             char *name;
>             char *value; /* "existence" bool may have NULL,
>                           * otherwise probably a string "= value"
>                           */
>             char *value_comment;
>             struct config_var *next; /* pointer to the next one
>                                       * in the section
>                                       */
>         };
> 
> Obviously, data structures like these would make it even easier
> if we decide we do _not_ care about comments (we would just lose
> x_comment fields, parse the thing and write the resulting list
> out).