Thanks Sven, I tried to look at the code, but couldn't download anything...I'm not currently shopping for another human-readable serialization format, but when I'm forced to change, I'll keep this in mind... Thanks, Dale ----- Original Message ----- | From: "Sven Van Caekenberghe" <sven@stfx.eu> | To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr | Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 2:38:17 PM | Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Parsing Smalltalk Array/Object Literals | | Dale, | | Please, please look at the code. | | Again: no my code does _not_ depend on a Smalltalk compiler. | | And indeed, there are 2 steps: | | 1. String -> Array Literal | 2. Object Literal -> Object | | All in all, its very little code. | | Sven | | On 21 Oct 2012, at 20:23, Dale Henrichs <dhenrich@vmware.com> wrote: | | > Sven, | > | > I'm not asking about the parser for the literal array but the | > parser to parse the literal array itself, but I think you've | > answered my question (indirectly:) | > | > The original reason for going with JSON 9 months ago was that since | > GemStone does not have a accessible parser for Smalltalk syntax, I | > need to choose an export format for "objects" that included a | > portable parser for the syntax ... | > | > Presumably your implementation assumes the existence of a Smalltalk | > literal parser (I think that is what I was able to glean from | > Igor's mails) in which case I won't be able to use it (even if I | > thought it was usable from a readability standpoint:). | > | > Dale | | -- | Sven Van Caekenberghe | http://stfx.eu | Smalltalk is the Red Pill | | | | |