search for: writeryaml

...22, 2012, at 4:40 PM, Sean Silva wrote: >> Hey Nick, what's the status on YAML IO? The other thread seems to have died. > > I'm waiting on Michael Spencer's feedback. To better understand how a client would use YAML I/O. I've completely rewritten the ReaderYAML and WriterYAML in lld to use YAML I/O. The source code is now about half the size. But more importantly, the error checking is much, much better and any time an attribute (e.g. of an Atom) is changed or added, there is just one place to update the yaml code instead of two places (the reader and writer). Thi...

> To better understand how a client would use YAML I/O. I've completely rewritten the ReaderYAML and WriterYAML in lld to use YAML I/O. The source code is now about half the size. But more importantly, the error checking is much, much better and any time an attribute (e.g. of an Atom) is changed or added, there is just one place to update the yaml code instead of two places (the reader and writer). Fanta...

...e yaml into an in-memory binary object, then runs the Reader to return a File*. I'll be prototyping this approach for mach-o. -Nick On Oct 25, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Sean Silva wrote: >> To better understand how a client would use YAML I/O. I've completely rewritten the ReaderYAML and WriterYAML in lld to use YAML I/O. The source code is now about half the size. But more importantly, the error checking is much, much better and any time an attribute (e.g. of an Atom) is changed or added, there is just one place to update the yaml code instead of two places (the reader and writer). >...

...uns the > Reader to return a File*. I'll be prototyping this approach for mach-o. > > -Nick > > > On Oct 25, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Sean Silva wrote: >>> To better understand how a client would use YAML I/O. I've >>> completely rewritten the ReaderYAML and WriterYAML in lld to use >>> YAML I/O. The source code is now about half the size. But more >>> importantly, the error checking is much, much better and any time >>> an attribute (e.g. of an Atom) is changed or added, there is just >>> one place to update the yaml co...

On Oct 22, 2012, at 4:40 PM, Sean Silva wrote: > Hey Nick, what's the status on YAML IO? The other thread seems to have died.\ I'm waiting on Michael Spencer's feedback. The issues I know of right now are: 1) Should we structure YAML I/O to be a more general I/O utility that could support reading and writing other data formats such as JSON or plists. RIght now, all the code is

Hey Nick, what's the status on YAML IO? The other thread seems to have died. -- Sean Silva

...Reader to return a File*. I'll be prototyping this approach for mach-o. >> >> -Nick >> >> >> On Oct 25, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Sean Silva wrote: >>>> To better understand how a client would use YAML I/O. I've completely rewritten the ReaderYAML and WriterYAML in lld to use YAML I/O. The source code is now about half the size. But more importantly, the error checking is much, much better and any time an attribute (e.g. of an Atom) is changed or added, there is just one place to update the yaml code instead of two places (the reader and writer). >&g...