YAML Ain't Markup Language

On Friday 03 September 2004 04:43 pm, Clark C. Evans wrote:
> Really, this is 1.2 as we
> =A0 =A0should have bumped the version when we got rid of default implicit
> =A0 =A0typing... let's not make the same mistake twice.

Okay, I wasn't around for this. So implicit typing is gone already? Just=20
hasn't caught up to my version of Syck yet? Is that what I'm hearing?

   - 23
   - !str 23

These are the same (semantically)?

   - 23
   - !int 23

Are not the same?

Or are they? With Oren's "For the last time, NO." plan.

  - !tag:yaml.org,2002:int 23
  - !int 23

Aren't the same either. But in fact, an "unmodified" loader will think they=
're=20
both strings!

=2D-=20
T.

T. Onoma wrote:

>On Friday 03 September 2004 04:43 pm, Clark C. Evans wrote:
>  
>
>>Really, this is 1.2 as we
>>   should have bumped the version when we got rid of default implicit
>>   typing... let's not make the same mistake twice.
>>    
>>
>
>Okay, I wasn't around for this. So implicit typing is gone already? Just 
>hasn't caught up to my version of Syck yet? Is that what I'm hearing?
>  
>
_default_ implicit typing is gone, t.  emancipation of types, courtesy 
of ole abe ingy.

look, we're only trying to sensibly turn the shortcut syntax into a 
clash-free environment for the external types.  i don't see why builtin 
types and user's private types can't share the generic namespace.  
ruby's default namespace contains both builtin and user-made classes.

_why

On Friday 03 September 2004 05:45 pm, why the lucky stiff wrote:

> _default_ implicit typing is gone, t.  emancipation of types, courtesy
> of ole abe ingy.

Thanks, _why. That clears some things up.

-- 
T.

(off list)

_why,

 I want to make sure you are happy with all of this and that
 it makes sense and that we won't be leaving any Ruby users
 stranded with this set of decisions.  Please feel free to 
 raise a hissy fit if anything is wrong, or if you would like,
 you can send me your concerns directly -- your choice.

 Glad you are helping out.  It's hard to keep everyone on the
 same page.

Cheers!

Clark

oops!  I guess it ain't off list ;)

On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 08:22:56PM -0400, Clark C. Evans wrote:
|        (off list)

On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 03:45:41PM -0600, why the lucky stiff wrote:
| look, we're only trying to sensibly turn the shortcut syntax into a 
| clash-free environment for the external types.  i don't see why builtin 
| types and user's private types can't share the generic namespace.  
| ruby's default namespace contains both builtin and user-made classes.

That's also true in the Python environment.  It just doesn't have
reserved keywords.  In fact, if you want to really mess with someone's
brain, you do...

   (True,False) = (False,True)

So, you're proposing that we leave the !stuffs ambiguous; as YAML adds
types, they go there.  And a parser could, by default, load its handlers
there.  But, private types could go there too. To make this "easier" for
those making private types, we follow David's suggestion:

On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 04:57:33AM +0100, David Hopwood wrote:
| I'm going to keep banging on about the issue of additions to the YAML
| tag repository. If there is a policy of restricting new names in the
| repository to, say, [a-zA-Z0-9_]+, then people can choose to use private
| names that do not match that regexp without any risk that they will be
| confusable with future repository-defined tags. (This is useful despite
| the fact that there is nothing preventing collisions between two private
| names in general.)

So, while people could use private tags, we'd clearly say that they
could make something that would collide with us down stream if
they used a tag from the regex given.

Clark