Re: ANN: Etiquette: a protocol construction tool

>>>>> "Peter" == Peter Seibel <[email protected]> writes:

    Peter> Miles Egan <[email protected]> writes:
    >> Peter Seibel wrote:
    >> 
    >> >Actually where I was hoping to go with my questions was to use
    >> >BEEP--assuming it was using XML for configuration foo--as an
    >> example >of a place where I think Lisp could win big--when
    >> something uses nasty >piles of XML for configuration, a Lisp
    >> implementation can hide the XML >behind a still text-based,
    >> still programatic interface (as opposed to >having to write
    >> some whizzy GUI tool to hide the horror) in the form >of a
    >> simple s-exp based config file that maps to the XML or better
    >> >yet, in some cases, a set of macros that allow the user to
    >> define >things much more concisely.
    >> >
    >> Drifting a little further afield of the clump charter...
    >> 
    >> There seems to be an unspoken assumption in the lisp community
    >> that s-exprs are inherently superior to xml and most people
    >> would really prefer to deal with them instead of xml given the
    >> chance.

    Peter> Well, I think that's crazy. If we know one thing, it's that
    Peter> non-Lisp people get the screeming heebie jeebies from
    Peter> s-exps. Simply replacing some XML gorp with isomorphic
    Peter> s-exps isn't doing anyone any favors except a die-hard Lisp
    Peter> programmer who really knows how to make Emacs tapdance over
    Peter> and around s-exps.

As a die-hard Lisp programmer who really knows how to make Emacs
tapdance over and around s-exps, seems like a great thing to do!

:-)
R