[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: [ddlm-group] Straw poll results
- To: Nick.Spadaccini@uwa.edu.au, Group finalising DDLm and associated dictionaries <ddlm-group@iucr.org>
- Subject: Re: [ddlm-group] Straw poll results
- From: "Herbert J. Bernstein" <yaya@bernstein-plus-sons.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 14:13:29 -0400 (EDT)
- In-Reply-To: <C6FAD8CF.120A5%nick@csse.uwa.edu.au>
- References: <C6FAD8CF.120A5%nick@csse.uwa.edu.au>
Dear Nick, I would suggest we discuss various approahes to deprecating features tomorrow over lunch, but it really is a very common practice in standards work, e.g. the handling of type-punning in gcc. It saves both users and developers a lot of aggravation and helps them to learn and adapt to new practices. Regards, Herbert ===================================================== Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121 Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769 +1-631-244-3035 yaya@dowling.edu ===================================================== On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Nick Spadaccini wrote: > > > > On 13/10/09 11:27 PM, "James Hester" <jamesrhester@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Here are the results of the straw poll. See the end of the email for >> detailed vote counts, and note the request for a further vote on >> certain issues. >> >> CONCLUSIONS >> =========== >> >> 1. UTF8 will be supported. Not clear on asciified version or >> binary. Therefore, please comment and vote on the following, given >> that UTF8 will be included in the new standard: >> >> (a) UTF8 should be supported in standard form only (i.e. 'binary' >> characters with values above 127 will appear in CIF files) >> >> (b) An asciified version only should be supported. An example would >> be the syntax \uxxxx, where xxxx refers to the Unicode code point of >> the character in hexadecimal notation. NB this is not strictly UTF8, >> but simply a Unicode representation. >> >> My vote: 1.a >> >> 2. Termination of quoted strings on first occurence of quote delimiter >> and restriction of character set for non-delimited strings: Approved, >> but not clear whether to deprecate first or move immediately to >> requirement. Upon long consideration of Brian's email and Herbert's >> reservations, and two cups of tea, and some chocolate, I am happy to >> change my votes to 1.2 and 2.3 (and perhaps call the new CIF syntax >> 2.0 rather than 1.2), therefore I declare these proposals approved as >> a requirement in the new standard. I'll write a separate email on >> this. >> >> However: Brian and James want to require whitespace between tokens >> outside compound expressions regardless of it now becoming strictly >> unnecessary in several cases. Given that the above proposals have >> been passed, please vote again on the following options: >> >> (a) Whitespace is not required between tokens unless tokens could not >> otherwise be separated; writers are encouraged to pad between tokens >> (b) Whitespace must always appear between tokens outside compound expressions >> (c) Whitespace must always appear between tokens both in and outside >> compound expressions >> >> My vote: 2.b >> >> Detailed vote summary >> ===================== >> >> Issue1: Removing the requirement for a trailing whitespace after >> quoted strings outside of bracketed constructs. >> Options: 1.1. Preserve the current convention as is >> 1.2. Terminate all quoted strings on the occurance of the >> trailing quoted delimiter without consideration of the next character >> 1.3 Deprecate rather than require 1.2 > > What does deprecate rather than require 1.2 mean? If a scientist asks, what > does the formal language specification state concerning the absolute need > for whitespace before and after a token, what is the answer? > > Please don't say we deprecate (definition: earnestly disapprove of) > whitespace, that is just plain silly. In the specification a quoted string > is terminated by the first occurrence of the matching quote (1.2), or it is > terminated by a quote immediately followed by one or more whitespace (in > which case you are actually voting for 1.1). > > Again (and again and again, how many times do I have to say this?) > deprecation has to do with an implementation. What are we specifying? > >> 1.1: Nobody (Herbert prefers if 1.3 not an option) >> 1.2: Brian (but whitespace required between tokens), Nick, Simon >> 1.3: Herbert, James (but whitespace required between tokens) >> >> Difficult to determine any clear preference from John W., but he seems >> happy to go along with the changes we are discussing so long as there >> is a clear fallback position. >> >> Issue2: Restriction of the character set for non-delimited strings >> outside of bracketed constructs >> Options 2.1. Preserve the current convention as is >> 2.2. Modify the current convention to deprecate use of >> any characters other than a strictly limited set >> of characters, adding a warning oon reads and >> defaulting to add quote marks on write >> 2.3. Modify the current convention to forbid the use of >> any characters other than a strctly limited set >> of characters, making it an error to read a non-delimited >> string that does not comply even if the intention >> can be inferred from context > > Same question, earnestly disapproving of a character set is not a > specification. What will be specified for the language? Is the , allowed or > not allowed in an unquoted string? >> >> 2.1: Nobody >> 2.2: Herbert, James >> 2.3: Nick, Simon, (John) >> >> UTF8: >> >> Do not use: Nobody >> Use: Simon, Brian, John >> Use, binary: Herbert, James >> Use, asciified: Nick >> >> A clear preference for binary or ascii can't be gleaned from Brian and >> Simon's and John's emails, so I've left them as simply 'Use'. >> > > cheers > > Nick > > -------------------------------- > Associate Professor N. Spadaccini, PhD > School of Computer Science & Software Engineering > > The University of Western Australia t: +61 (0)8 6488 3452 > 35 Stirling Highway f: +61 (0)8 6488 1089 > CRAWLEY, Perth, WA 6009 AUSTRALIA w3: www.csse.uwa.edu.au/~nick > MBDP M002 > > CRICOS Provider Code: 00126G > > e: Nick.Spadaccini@uwa.edu.au > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ddlm-group mailing list > ddlm-group@iucr.org > http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group > _______________________________________________ ddlm-group mailing list ddlm-group@iucr.org http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ddlm-group] Straw poll results (Nick Spadaccini)
- References:
- Re: [ddlm-group] Straw poll results (Nick Spadaccini)
- Prev by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Straw poll results
- Next by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Straw poll results
- Prev by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Straw poll results
- Next by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Straw poll results
- Index(es):