Smart config file parsing

[Gustavo Niemeyer]

> For the same reasons you'd use any standard library feature: higher
> expectation of code correctnesss due to a larger user base, reduction of
> code in your application (even if it's only a few dozen lines), etc.

Again, I really doubt it will be less code.

> ConfigParser might be slower, but I doubt it would be significantly
> slower (i.e. something an end-user would notice).  It's also worth
> noting that an oft-requested feature (config variables) would also be
> available as a bonus.

The channel definition is just a textual representation of the
internal format, and variables wouldn't be useful in that context.

In any case, if you have good ideas on how much better ConfigParser
could be, I'll be happy to review a patch.  I don't have motivation to
work on such minor refactorings myself.  I'd rather spend that time on
something that would actually provide a visible benefit.

-- 
Gustavo Niemeyer
http://niemeyer.net