Portable S-expressions
Lassi Kortela
(16 Apr 2021 09:40 UTC)
|
Re: Portable S-expressions
John Cowan
(20 Apr 2021 12:09 UTC)
|
Re: Portable S-expressions
elf
(20 Apr 2021 12:14 UTC)
|
Re: Portable S-expressions
Lassi Kortela
(20 Apr 2021 12:49 UTC)
|
Re: Portable S-expressions
elf
(20 Apr 2021 12:59 UTC)
|
Re: Portable S-expressions
Lassi Kortela
(20 Apr 2021 13:09 UTC)
|
Re: Portable S-expressions
John Cowan
(20 Apr 2021 19:29 UTC)
|
Re: Portable S-expressions
Lassi Kortela
(20 Apr 2021 20:55 UTC)
|
Re: Portable S-expressions
Peter Bex
(20 Apr 2021 12:22 UTC)
|
Re: Portable S-expressions
Lassi Kortela
(20 Apr 2021 13:03 UTC)
|
Re: Portable S-expressions
Peter Bex
(20 Apr 2021 13:15 UTC)
|
Re: Portable S-expressions
Lassi Kortela
(20 Apr 2021 13:27 UTC)
|
Re: Portable S-expressions Lassi Kortela (20 Apr 2021 13:33 UTC)
|
> Like elf, I'd prefer to prioritize a clean representation of all > datatypes over absolute compat with existing stuff. It seems a good > balance can be struck quite easily. In practice, this means that if you are writing a throwaway script and know that the data files you have don't contain any weird strings or symbols, you can use reader in the data using the native reader of a Lisp implementation and due to the wide agreement on how "normal" symbols and strings are written, should work out ok. But for programs that have to read and write unknown data, to ensure correctness, you should use a dedicated library built for POSE. I find this a reasonable compromise.