From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,24d7acf9b853aac8 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8 Path: g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder2.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!194.134.4.91.MISMATCH!news2.euro.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed6.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!news.skynet.be!aioe.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Yannick_Duch=C3=AAne_=28Hibou57?= =?utf-8?Q?=29?= Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: S-expression I/O in Ada Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 03:02:23 +0200 Organization: Ada At Home Message-ID: References: <547afa6b-731e-475f-a7f2-eaefefb25861@k8g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <1qk2k63kzh7yv$.3jgc403xcqdw$.dlg@40tude.net> <8ae8e899-9eef-4c8c-982e-bfdfc10072f1@h17g2000pri.googlegroups.com> <258zlxrv4fn6.1vszho1rtmf48$.dlg@40tude.net> <984db477-973c-4a66-9bf6-e5348c9b95f2@n19g2000prf.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: M2yP1Cx/h9YxW/Ct5b534Q.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 User-Agent: Opera Mail/10.60 (Win32) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:13260 Date: 2010-08-14T03:02:23+02:00 List-Id: Le Sat, 07 Aug 2010 09:23:01 +0200, Natacha Kerensikova = a =C3=A9crit: > I think text-based format is very useful when the file has to be dealt= > with by both humans and programs. The typical example would be > configuration files: read and written by humans, and used by the > program. And that's where I believe XML is really poor, because it's > too heavy for human use. I use XML near to every day, I use to write in the raw text editor named= = PSPad, without any troubles. A lot of people write HTML (which like XML = is = a kind of SGML), for years some people wrote in Docbook document modal, = = which again come from SGML. XML can be as simple as S-Expressions are, = providing you avoid using attributes (if you really feel you do not need= = such a thing). If you feel XML is too much heavy because it requires clo= se = tag, then just think about it as the Ada's =E2=80=9Cend if=E2=80=9D, =E2= =80=9Cend case=E2=80=9D, =E2=80=9Cend = loop=E2=80=9D and so on. These closes tags enforce human readability and= help = reliability in the sence that one always know what is starting and endin= g, = and a close-tag missmatch help to detect an error was done. These all mi= ss = from S-Expression (do you know what LISP was named after by the way ? ;= ) ) I you still feel XML is too much heavy, then just read this : http://quoderat.megginson.com/2007/01/03/all-markup-ends-up-looking-like= -xml/ This demonstrate that as things goes, none of XML, LISP expressions or = JSon, none is more simple than the other, and LISP expressions or JSon = serializations just looks simple on very simple cases. When thing goes, = = this is another story. Did not wanted to make you change your mind (this idea is far from my = though), rather wanted to make you see there is no way to assert XML is = = too much heavy of LISP expressions are more human readable (I have never= = seen a readable LISP program by the way... I feel this is maid to be rea= d = by machines, not human). -- = There is even better than a pragma Assert: a SPARK --# check. --# check C and WhoKnowWhat and YouKnowWho; --# assert Ada; -- i.e. forget about previous premises which leads to conclusion -- and start with new conclusion as premise.