John Cowan writes:
> Magnus Achim Deininger scripsit:
>
>> is mostly the blob contents verbatim, i.e. without converting it
>> to hex first, except for some special characters.
>
> If we must have blob syntax at all, I agree that hex is The Right Thing,
> but allowing interspersed whitespace.
Hmm, I must've had some other syntax in mind there, yenc only has verbatim
encoding for most stuff in the regular text range it seems, or at least
that's how it appears when looking at the provided sample zips.
But yeah, to enter whitespace manually, hex all the way. Definitely not
R6RSs decimal-
Magnus Achim Deininger scripsit:
> =ybegin=yend
>
> is mostly the blob contents verbatim, i.e. without converting it
> to hex first, except for some special characters.
According to http://www.yenc.org/yenc-draft.1.3.txt , the format is
much more complex than that (involving multiple lines and
Ah true, I had forgotten that the original post was about new read syntax
for blobs, not read/write syntax.
For the sake of discussion, I'll sum up the typical yEnc Syntax:
=ybegin=yend
is mostly the blob contents verbatim, i.e. without converting it to
hex first, except for some special c
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 04:28:17PM +0200, Magnus Achim Deininger wrote:
> What about yEnc instead of a sequence of numbers?
This discussion is about a convient notation for humans to enter blobs
directly, not about an efficient way to store blobs on disk.
I for one have no idea what the yEnc form
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 19:49:36 +0200, Alex Queiroz
wrote:
Hallo,
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Alaric Snell-Pym
wrote:
Why not? Sure, to read/write them we have to pick *some* kind of model
(an even-lengthed string of nibbles, in this case) but it's arbitrary;
it doesn't matter as long a
From: Kon Lovett
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] blob-literal read syntax
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 09:48:44 -0700
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 1:16 AM, Felix wrote:
>
>> Hello!
>>
>> I have added read-syntax for blob-literals and currently use
>>
>> #{
From: Peter Bex
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] blob-literal read syntax
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 15:39:46 +0200
>
> What about #blob(...) or #m(...) (for "memory") if "blob" causes
> trouble with binary number literal syntax?
Yes, that would look ambiguous, I guess.
Hallo,
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Alaric Snell-Pym
wrote:
>
> Why not? Sure, to read/write them we have to pick *some* kind of model
> (an even-lengthed string of nibbles, in this case) but it's arbitrary;
> it doesn't matter as long as it can represent all strings of bytes (the
> eight-bit
On 10/18/10 15:31, John Cowan wrote:
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Alaric Snell-Pym
wrote:
In my cosy little world, blobs are just an ordered sequence of
addressible memory cells, with no particular interpretation of the
contents as numbers, characters, or smells, while SRFI-4 places defin
On Oct 18, 2010, at 1:16 AM, Felix wrote:
Hello!
I have added read-syntax for blob-literals and currently use
#{}
Since this may block the use of "#{ ... }" for user-defined read-
syntax,
I want to ask if perhaps another syntax might be preferrable. Any
ideas? Or would the syntax above be
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Alaric Snell-Pym
wrote:
> In my cosy little world, blobs are just an ordered sequence of
> addressible memory cells, with no particular interpretation of the
> contents as numbers, characters, or smells, while SRFI-4 places definite
> semantic models on the conten
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 04:16:52AM -0400, Felix wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I have added read-syntax for blob-literals and currently use
>
> #{}
>
> Since this may block the use of "#{ ... }" for user-defined read-syntax,
> I want to ask if perhaps another syntax might be preferrable.
I think the bra
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 03:24:10PM +0200, Thomas Chust wrote:
> 2010/10/18 Felix :
> > [...]
> > I have added read-syntax for blob-literals and currently use
> >
> > #{}
> >
> > [...]
> > I want to ask if perhaps another syntax might be preferrable. Any
> > ideas?
> > [...]
>
> Hello,
>
> it see
2010/10/18 Felix :
> [...]
> I have added read-syntax for blob-literals and currently use
>
> #{}
>
> [...]
> I want to ask if perhaps another syntax might be preferrable. Any
> ideas?
> [...]
Hello,
it seems useful to me to have such syntax available, but I would find it
even more convenient if
On 10/18/10 13:45, John Cowan wrote:
Christian Kellermann scripsit:
Hm does this gain much? The default would be #{..} and if I need
#evilbits{...} I could still do so couldn't I? #blob{...} or
anything else just adds characters to the default imho. Unless #{
... } is already in use for someth
Christian Kellermann scripsit:
> Hm does this gain much? The default would be #{..} and if I need
> #evilbits{...} I could still do so couldn't I? #blob{...} or
> anything else just adds characters to the default imho. Unless #{
> ... } is already in use for something else, I am all for it.
R6RS
Hi!
* Alaric Snell-Pym [101018 12:18]:
> I'm happy with that, or #blob{} to allow room to expand by using
> other tags than 'blob', maybe. *shrug*
Hm does this gain much? The default would be #{..} and if I need
#evilbits{...} I could still do so couldn't I? #blob{...} or
anything else just add
On 10/18/10 09:16, Felix wrote:
Hello!
I have added read-syntax for blob-literals and currently use
#{}
Since this may block the use of "#{ ... }" for user-defined read-syntax,
I want to ask if perhaps another syntax might be preferrable. Any
ideas? Or would the syntax above be ok for such
Hello!
I have added read-syntax for blob-literals and currently use
#{}
Since this may block the use of "#{ ... }" for user-defined read-syntax,
I want to ask if perhaps another syntax might be preferrable. Any
ideas? Or would the syntax above be ok for such a built-in object.
cheers,
felix
20 matches
Mail list logo
