Re: CMSP 06. Data structures, not YAML

2009-10-10 Thread Zefram
Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: I really don't think we should have Perl data structures in files (that means Perl code, right?), because that indicates doing an eval, Not necessarily. Working in *a defined subset of* Perl syntax would mean that readers have both options. Evaling would probably be

Re: CMSP 06. Data structures, not YAML

2009-10-09 Thread David Golden
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 7:44 AM, David Golden xda...@gmail.com wrote: 06. Data structures, not YAML Proposal: The META spec should be defined in terms of (Perl) data structures, and not in terms of YAML. (Slaven Rezic) Comments: * This does not mean that I want to replace YAML by a Perl

Re: CMSP 06. Data structures, not YAML

2009-10-09 Thread Steffen Mueller
Ricardo Signes wrote: * David Golden xda...@gmail.com [2009-10-09T07:44:43] 06. Data structures, not YAML Proposal: The META spec should be defined in terms of (Perl) data structures, and not in terms of YAML. (Slaven Rezic) Agreed, but the spec should be very clear (perhaps, as said, in an

Re: CMSP 06. Data structures, not YAML

2009-10-09 Thread Ricardo Signes
* Jarkko Hietaniemi j...@iki.fi [2009-10-09T10:11:35] I really don't think we should have Perl data structures in files (that means Perl code, right?), because that indicates doing an eval, and I don't want to eval any more random code off the 'net than necessary. Right. We definitely want a

Re: CMSP 06. Data structures, not YAML

2009-10-09 Thread Graham Barr
On Oct 9, 2009, at 9:11 AM, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: I really don't think we should have Perl data structures in files (that means Perl code, right?), because that indicates doing an eval, and I don't want to eval any more random code off the 'net than necessary. I strongly agree that we