Bruno, Using lists of lists alleviates of the issues that Joseph mentions with object properties. With nested list there are safe and easy ways to handle these types of conflicts since we can increment array indices with predictable and non-destructive outcomes. You point about lambdas is correct. Depending on how you implmenet it, you may just move the problem from that of the conflicting object properties to that of the conflicting lambdas.
Michael On 10/19/14, 3:35 AM, "Bruno Gonzalez (aka stenyak)" <sten...@stenyak.com> wrote: > > >Renamed keys for user-facing dicts, and application lambdas for >user-hidden dicts sounds reasonable to me. > >What about different lambdas affecting each other while they run? E.g. >two client-side lambdas trying to solve the same conflict. Or also, >since lambdas can potentially do *anything* in the json data, >server-side lambdas may affect other concurrent lambdas that weren't >even working on the very same conflict. Would a global conflict lock be >used to prevent it, or is there any strategy to guarantee these issues >won't happen? > >I'm assuming ditching json for a simpler format (just lists of lists), >delegating dictionary implementation to each application, is either a >dumb idea, or just another variant of same original problem (since I >guess we would end up providing a dictionary emulation library using >lists of (key,value) lists anyway, which applications may or may not >use, so exactly like current situation with lists and dicts). > >-- > >Regards/Saludos, > Bruno Gonzalez > >http://www.stenyak.com | stenyak @ irc://irc.freenode.net >
