This is not either/or. There is room for an alternative, spec-enforcing, EDN reader. A drop-in replacement, as it were, for those inclined to try it. If you want speed, you use Transit anyway, right?
P.S. Even better if the alternative, compliant, reader were compatibly licensed, to replace the original in Clojure 2. On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 7:01:04 PM UTC-5 EuAndreh wrote: > Andy Fingerhut <andy.fi...@gmail.com> writes: > > > My personal guess: the authors of the EDN specification and > > implementation are content with their level of detail, and might not be > > interested in making them 100% equivalent in all ways. (This is only my > > personal guess. Realize that making specifications and implementations > > match can be an exhausting and unrewarding process.) > > Agree on "making the implementation match the specification" being an > arduous task, as I am trying to do it myself in working in an edn > implementation. > > However, I don't see a way around this type of job being an > specification. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/clojure/5ff53710-9f35-42df-a814-977ced816e67n%40googlegroups.com.
