Armando Blancas <abm221...@gmail.com> writes: > I'd say on the basis of convenience, since we get to serialize and > deserialize for free (o with customizations), and for most cases the > author on both ends is likely to be the same person or team.
I find that to be a specious defense. If we expect the same author to be on both ends of the wire or reading the files he wrote himself, why take interest in such a specified format anyway? > For other languages, producers don't work any harder either way, and > consumers are free to interpret both the schema and data as they > need. It sounds like you've ignored the thrust of my concern rather than settling it. > sexp's only have a list notation because that's all lisp had, and even > then, some people got it all for free. That tail did not wag that dog. -- Steven E. Harris -- 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
