I'm reading RFC 3339 in preparation to defend my position and I just read the most incredible sentence. I've copied it below:https://twitter.com/myrrlyn/status/1215034347146727424 …
Show this thread
-
as with unicode handling, this seems like something that the config library should delegate to the datetime library, and not vice versa though the toml crate has its own type instead of using core::time or chrono, which I should investigate rather than continue Posting
It's much easier to delegate to the datetime library when you don't make datetime a dedicated type in the format :) I don't think the comparison to unicode is fair, since the decoder fundamentally has to care about strings to parse its input
-
-
I meant to bring up Unicode only in the sense that the grammar is not required to know information about the meaning of the text (parsing a stream of char is obviously Way Too Much Abstraction; requiring UTF-8 or a bad encoding is ok), only its shape, and delegate to specialists
-
but my abstract position is that nobody blinks at the fact that parsing a 754 literal correctly requires a detailed format and behavior specification, and 754 literals don't need to be wrapped as opaque text for a config lang. we can lift other complex literals to that level also
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.