Hi, On Aug 25, 4:24 pm, Licenser <heinz.g...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I wonder what is the reason clojure uses XML standard wise and not > JSON. In the past I've found that JSON is much cleaner to read, and > much easier to represent data structures in. I know XML is a buzzword, > but JSON is on it's way to become one too. And yes I know Java uses > XML extensively, in my eyes too extensively in many parts, but isn't > one goal of Clojure not to repeat Javas mistakes? > > On another note, wouldn't Clojure itself or rather a subset of clojure > be best to represent data? So to say something like CON? > > Or do I miss something that makes it important for Clojure to be > bundled so tightly with XML? The "usual" approach is to use print and read to (de-)serialise Clojure values (see also *print-dup*). The only place where Clojure is in some way "bundled" with XML is clojure.xml. But you don't have to use it. Clojure works perfectly fine without it. In clojure-contrib there is also a JSON reader/writer. So Clojure actually provides you with all three ways, without forcing or prefering one style. I mostly use XML for serialisation because I have to interface into Java libraries, which use it. Hence in my situation XML has the least impedance mismatch. Sincerely Meikel --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
