> The purpose of this project is to define (and then implement) a DSL
> for serialization.
If a DSL is what you are looking for, then I withdraw my proposal.
The idea of hosting yet another DSL inside Django project scares me a
little.
I'll just implement my idea as a separate project, I guess.
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 11:31 AM, DaNmarner wrote:
>> So - show me what it would look like. Show me how I, as a third party,
>> would use your proposed syntax to define output that would match
>> Django's existing serialization scheme. Yes, this serialization format
>> will exist as a built in defa
> So - show me what it would look like. Show me how I, as a third party,
> would use your proposed syntax to define output that would match
> Django's existing serialization scheme. Yes, this serialization format
> will exist as a built in default; but I should be able to reproduce
> that format in
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:44 AM, DaNmarner wrote:
>> 1) It's almost illegible. Between your mail client's munging of line
>> wrapping, and the completely unreadable code samples, it's very
>> difficult to tell if you have presented a good idea.
>
> Pardon the format. I actually auto-wrapped the tex
As a side note: I encountered the use case for customizing
serialization last summer when building my own blog project (I wanted
an app that could import/export my models from/to wordpress/blogger
XML. The API I proposed largely emerged from my thought back then. I'm
willing to commit efforts to ma
> 1) It's almost illegible. Between your mail client's munging of line
> wrapping, and the completely unreadable code samples, it's very
> difficult to tell if you have presented a good idea.
Pardon the format. I actually auto-wrapped the text with vim and copy
pasted at the first time. Realizing
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 6:58 AM, DaNmarner wrote:
> I've got some more crystalized details about my proposal.
>
> Here are the target result if this proposal is implementated:
>
> 1. User could configure serialization for each model.
>
> 2. In fact, user could configure the serialization details do
After a few days' consideration, I've got some more crystalized
details about my proposal.
Here are the target result if this proposal is implementated:
1. User could configure serialization for each model.
2. In fact, user could configure the serialization details down to
each field of each mod
I've got some more crystalized details about my proposal.
Here are the target result if this proposal is implementated:
1. User could configure serialization for each model.
2. In fact, user could configure the serialization details down to
each field
of each model. That means:
3. The key n
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 1:28 PM, DaNmarner wrote:
> First of all: my native language is not English, so I apologize for
> any potential natural language error (or any error at all) below.
>
> After (briefly) reading through the current implementaion as well as
> the "Issues to consider" section in
First of all: my native language is not English, so I apologize for
any potential natural language error (or any error at all) below.
After (briefly) reading through the current implementaion as well as
the "Issues to consider" section in the GSoC2011 page on wiki, my
initial observation is that t
11 matches
Mail list logo
