Am 24.04.2012 um 23:50 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]>:
> We will write a parser because we do not want a JSON syntax.
> I started and I will continue.
>
> Hannes I think that igor did a lot for us and that he knows probably more
> than you what is to work for the community. Because Igor could be working for
> Google
> right now without any problem. So let us appreciate to have guys like him in
> our community.
>
Stef, the last paragraph has an unfortunate ratio. The last sentence is fine
but the first two are not. You have the right to be stubborn but I don't think
you have the right to be so arrogant and unfair.
Norbert
>
>> Igor,
>>
>> Let me rephrase the context. It is that you started this thread
>> yesterday Monday Apr 23, 2012 at 11:34 .You said that you are not
>> pleased with storing Smalltalk meta data in JSON format.
>>
>> You gave the example
>>
>> {
>> "category" : "Cypress-Tests",
>> "classinstvars" : [
>> ],
>> "classtraitcomposition" : "{}",
>> "classvars" : [
>> ],
>> "commentStamp" : "",
>> "instvars" : [
>> ],
>> "name" : "CypressPatchTest",
>> "pools" : [
>> ],
>> "super" : "CypressAbstractTest",
>> "traitcomposition" : "{}",
>> "type" : "normal" }
>>
>> The cypress project URL is
>>
>> https://github.com/CampSmalltalk/Cypress
>>
>> This is Dale Henrichs' work.
>>
>> Cypress uses JSON for storing the meta data.
>>
>> There is a button called 'Fork' on the git hub project.
>>
>> Dale is willing to take arguments if they are based on code.
>> For many people JSON is fine.
>>
>> HTH :-)
>>
>> Hannes
>>
>> On 4/24/12, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On 24 April 2012 14:17, Herby Vojčík <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 24 April 2012 11:54, Dale Henrichs<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Stef,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is no Parser class and there is no Compiler class. There is a
>>>>>> primitive call that takes method source, class, methodDictionary, etc.
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> produces a method installed in the methodDictionary.
>>>>>>
>>>>> so you can take 1st literal from such method and you done. or you
>>>>> cannot access method's literals?
>>>>> it of course not as simple as parsing the source, but if you cannot
>>>>> avoid compilation..
>>>>>
>>>>>> ... JSON is and was a pragmatic choice...
>>>>>>
>>>>> well, i did not realized that GemStone have no own parser/compiler
>>>>> written in smalltalk.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Neither does Amber in deploy mode, unless I am mistaken.
>>>>
>>>> Why do you ever think there must be a Smalltalk parser in any Smalltalk?
>>>> You
>>>> get used to it, I understand, but it is by no means a required thing.
>>>> Smalltalk is Smalltalk without parser as well.
>>>>
>>>> JSON is great choice. Much better than anything proprietary, because of
>>>> world-wide interoperability.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry, but you seem even more out of the context than me.
>>> We're talking about tools for storing and loading smalltalk code..
>>> which implies having a working smalltalk
>>> parser and compiler toolchain.
>>> How else you can load smalltalk source code without having the way to parse
>>> it?
>>> If you don't parse nor compile it, it is just a bunch of letters.
>>>
>>>> Herby
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>> Igor Stasenko.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
