you know, it is like C and their makefiles.. in C world they cannot express the project metadata using C syntax.. that's why they using this weird makefiles (and many other .project formats) to glue things together.. But hey, we can express things in smalltalk. So, why adding extra tool to the toolchain?
My point is not about whether it is better to use JSON over another format. My point is that we can use smalltalk all the way down. Because it means less dependencies and simpler tool chain (you need to have only smalltalk parser to handle everything stored in your files, and no extra stuff). Because tomorrow, other guy could say: hey i love xml and i want to store this in xml.. and provide same arguments: it is used worldwide, and can be used for interoperability with other languages... and so on, so on. And he will be totally right, except from the fact that we don't need it. My argument is purely pragmatic: it is better having just one parser to parse all data than two or more. More formats, more syntax(es) means more things to worry about, and maintain. On 24 April 2012 13:02, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: > On 24 April 2012 12:53, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Igor, >>> >>> It is pretty clear that JSON is slowly replacing even XML elsewhere and >>> if I for instance have to chose between XML and JSON, I'd certainly >>> choose later. Our chunk format is, well, ours only. VW is using XML, >>> others are using anything else. >> >> In a really really bad way. Because the tags are used in a non sense way. >> You still have to parse method to get the selector :) So VW is far from >> an example. And we are not talking about the method format, just method >> metadata. >> >>> Something as neutral and as simple as >>> JSON-based format can therefore become a bridge even between us. >>> >>> JSON is now becoming defacto standard for any interoperability scenario >>> in cloud world, so IMO Dale did a right decision to choose it. We will >>> be much closer to other words with Smalltalk that way >> >> Not at all. Do you really think that somebody will be interested by >> Smalltalk just because >> metadata of methods are stored in JSON :) >> Come on. > > yeah. lets store our metadata in SQL syntax.. so we are closer to SQL > databases.. > LOL :) > >> >>> and even more by >>> using GitHub for code repository. >> >> >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
