From: Jamis Buck <jgb3@...>
Date: 2004-05-05T07:54:40+09:00
Subject: Re: YAML vs. Marshal

why the lucky stiff wrote:

> Reinvention?  YAML is already a serialization language.  All we're 
> talking about is providing a bytecode to allow efficiency where 
> readability isn't needed.  It's no different from Rite in that regard.  
> We don't need to tax the parser all the time.
> 
> You could use the same useful YAML APIs but have Marshal's tightness.  I 
> don't know about you, but I'm convinced!
> 

I'll speak up in _why's defense here, and say I'm convinced, too. 
Besides: where in Ruby is there only a single way to do anything? It 
certainly can't hurt to have YAML bytecode, and once it is available, 
people will find ways to use it. Possibly even ways that _why didn't 
foresee.

I say, go for it!

-- 
Jamis Buck
jgb3@email.byu.edu
http://www.jamisbuck.org/jamis

ruby -h | ruby -e 
'a=[];readlines.join.scan(/-(.)\[e|Kk(\S*)|le.l(..)e|#!(\S*)/) {|r| a << 
r.compact.first };puts "\n>#{a.join(%q/ /)}<\n\n"'