On 4/24/12, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: > On 24 April 2012 12:50, H. Hirzel <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 4/24/12, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On 24 Apr 2012, at 11:10, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >>> >>>>>> And yet again I point to Tirade :) >>>>>> >>>>>> http://goran.krampe.se/blog/Squeak/Tirade.rdoc >>>>>> http://goran.krampe.se/blog/Squeak/Tirade2.rdoc >>>>>> http://goran.krampe.se/blog/Squeak/Tirade3.rdoc >>>>>> >>>>>> Especially Tirade2 above shows a bit about size (4 classes, 500 loc) >>>>>> speed and portability. Tirade is basically a parser for Smalltalk >>>>>> messages that only are allowed to use literals as arguments (although >>>>>> arbitrarily nested literals). >>>>>> >>>>>> Which is exactly what Stef describes + a bit more. :) >>>>> >>>>> Yeah, I remember reading that a long time ago. It is indeed a cool >>>>> idea, >>>>> Göran. Reminds me of the Erlang related UBF >>>>> (http://www.sics.se/~joe/ubf/site/home.html). >>>>> >>>>> I think the JSON choise is not bad: it is simple and universally >>>>> accepted. >>>> >>>> But you can express **EXACTLY** the same with >>>> #( >>>> >>>> >>>> ) >>>> >>>> So what is the point? >>>> >>>> Stef >>> >>> Yes, you are right, they are technically mostly equivalent. (JSON has >>> simpler primitive types, clear escapes, lists/arrays and >>> maps/dictionaries). >>> >>> But the point is, there are so many formats out there, and everybody >>> likes >>> to make there own. >>> >>> If you pick JSON, the discussion ends. It is an RFC standard. >> > > If you pick smalltalk , it is ansi standard.. so.. what the point? > >> +1
There is already a documentation of the format. No additional work needed. >> >>> If you pick something that looks suspiciously like some (for most people) >>> weird programming language you will get discussions, always. >>> >>> Dale said so: it is a pragmatic choice. >> >> +1 >> >>> Now, given the fact that the domain here is Smalltalk anyway, there is >>> something to say for using a Smalltalk based representation. >>> >>> But then you need to write a clear spec and a non-compiler based parser. >>> >>> With the JSON meta data, you could envision other non-Smalltalk tools >>> using >>> it more easily. >> >> +1 > > this is killer argument ;) > > can you name just one which can be useful in this context??? > what tools, except written in smalltalk and used by smalltalkers you > are expecting to use > with smalltalk source code stored in source code repositories? JavaScript :-) in connection with Amber. And couchDB. > > Sorry, the only valid and understandable argument here to me, is that > it is purely pragmatic choice :) And as Dale writes. It is already implemented in different dialects of Smalltalk. Thank you for asking Hannes > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. > >
