got three days meeting this week so crawling to get my brain aligned with fun again⦠I will read your article. I will also look at STON because I like the object literal syntax too :). (note that I'm not changing my mind - I still do not get why I need dictionary for method meta data - but we are thinking (and the team should discuss for real and not just during lunches) that having a literal object syntax would be cool). Stef
I would like to share my quick two cents regarding this subject.
1st cent. I would stick with JSON. Even though I find STON slick, I would not deviate from something that is mainstream and all Smalltalk dialects already support.
2nd cent. A Dictionary literal syntax would be useful too. I would like to have it.
It could be something like #{'this' -> 1. 'that' -> 2 }, and keep {1. 2} for dynamic arrays.
I don't want to sound like a broken record - but you do realize that I wrote about this in the article and mentioned this exact syntax?
I know, the article was a tad long - but just go to planet.smalltalk.org and search down to "Sidestory: Adding literal Dictionaries to Smalltalk?".
regards, Göran