On May 8, 2012, at 8:32 PM, Dale Henrichs wrote:

> :):):) for the correct definition of "works" I agree :):):)

sorry but I did not get it funny at all.
But if you laugh even better. So far I do not understand but I'm probably an 
idiot understand 
why we need dictionary syntax. But again this should be that I'm totally dull 
on that topics.
So I will not read mails about this topic anymore.
Too bad may be people could have gained from my idiot views.

Stef

> 
> Dale
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> | From: "Stéphane Ducasse" <[email protected]>
> | To: [email protected]
> | Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2012 10:46:08 AM
> | Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] A comparative article (was Re: [squeak-dev]    
> [ANN] STON - Smalltalk Object Notation)
> | 
> | for me I can understand that people want a format to exchange objects
> | and that they want to use STON but
> | I do not understand why we need that to store metadata when a simple
> | array works. Probably we love to
> | load our boat with extra readers and writers.
> | 
> | Stef
> | 
> | 
> | On May 8, 2012, at 2:05 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
> | 
> | > (The paper was indeed just updated a couple of days ago).
> | > 
> | > On 08 May 2012, at 13:29, Göran Krampe wrote:
> | > 
> | >> - In general I believe in 99% of the cases the parsing system has
> | >> to know what it is parsing, how the JSON looks and how it should
> | >> be mapped onto objects. Making the JSON parser itsy bitsy smarter
> | >> with type annotations doesn't help me there, I still need to know
> | >> that I want to instantiate a PDFPage and put this Rectangle into
> | >> it - but oh, perhaps not as a Rectangle, but perhaps as two
> | >> points sent into a class side instantiation message or something.
> | >> 
> | >> My point being that the type annotations doesn't "buy me" enough.
> | > 
> | > (Just for the sake of the argument, I don't want to convince you)
> | > 
> | > STON *does* buy you that: as long as we are talking about 'domain
> | > level objects' (a vague notion I agree) your Smalltalk object will
> | > serialize without any extra effort (see the ZnResponse example in
> | > the paper). You can customize some objects if you want to (mostly
> | > for readability, sometimes to fix some issue).
> | > 
> | > Object implements #toSton: and #fromSton: by iterating over the
> | > instances variables.
> | > 
> | > The issues are: Blocks, Classes and the fact that ephemeral
> | > instances are always serialized.
> | > 
> | > Sven
> | > 
> | > 
> | 
> | 
> | 
> 


Reply via email to