> > Java has arrays, lists, maps and sets, so does Ruby and Erlang. > > If they were redundancies in these structures, can't see why these three > still > maintain this distinction. It's probably a safe bet to say that we need to > convey these > nuances in edn somehow. > Let's keep this in perspective: this is not about conveying and not conveying. If edn had only vectors, the nuance could still be conveyed through a tag. This is ONLY about what gets baked in and what is left over to extensions.
Take a similar example from Java: there are no list/set/map literals in it. Sure, you can write an API call that mimics it, but it's nowhere near as convenient as a native construct. So, do we want edn to support the list/vector distinction only through extensions? Have our data files riddled with #list annotations? This is a strong argument in favor of the feature from the Clojure folks' perspective, while on the opposite side we have a quite weak motivation to make the format a tiny bit simpler to parse. -Marko -- 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
