[ apologies for the duplicate message. My previous reply was bounced by the ML. ]
> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 10:52, Andrew Haley <a...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> On 05/18/2010 04:05 PM, Dave Korn wrote: >> > On 18/05/2010 15:17, Steven Bosscher wrote: >> > >> >> IMHO, ideally we would have a syntax that is human readable and human >> >> writable. S-expressions are not as easy to read for me as something >> >> that resembles C. >> > >> > I'd like it that way too, but I acknowledge that it would be more work >> > and >> > it's not me who'd have to do that extra work... >> >> Well, it can always be changed later, but there's a lot to be said for >> not spending time now writing a parser, and getting on with the project. >> It's a matter of taste anyway. > Yup. This shade of blue can be changed later. Sandi, let's start with the S-expression syntax for everything. Richard is correct in pointing out that even gimple expressions have metadata associated with them that will need to be represented. Diego.
