Re: YAML

From: "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: YAML
Date: 2009-12-08 16:07:14
Message-ID: 7a8b68773c6457ae1833505983b23808@biglumber.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

> If the spec is in flux, that seems like More Than Sufficient reason
> to reject the patch for the time being. It can be resubmitted when
> it's no longer shooting at a moving target.

Saying that it is in flux is a bit of a stretch. Even if it were, the
parts that do change are nothing that will affect us. We're doing
dirt-simple YAML (and JSON) generation. Basically, 'name: value' pairs
plus some list building via indents and dashes. I'm completely not
worried about our usage ever falling afoul of future YAML or JSON
spec changes.

(This goes for the person on this list concerned about the output
being too hard to parse. Yes, YAML has lots of tiny corner cases
and elaborate syntax, but we're not using any of those, so parsing
should be quite possible for any YAML parser out there).

- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg(at)turnstep(dot)com
End Point Corporation
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200912081104
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEAREDAAYFAkseeZQACgkQvJuQZxSWSsjNlACg3j5zNPnGzNiXtRG0r9OZnlY3
qjkAoOvzcq+S9qLGQIMbZ0BH55P+TtH/
=icE3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

  • Re: YAML at 2009-12-08 15:40:54 from Tom Lane

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-12-08 16:10:45 Re: Sought after architectures for the PostgreSQL buildfarm?
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2009-12-08 15:51:01 Re: Sought after architectures for the PostgreSQL buildfarm?