[erlang-questions] [ANN] Erlson - dynamic name-value dictionary data type and syntax

[Juan Jose Comellas]

May I suggest switching the decoded JSON format to that used by ejson (
https://github.com/benoitc/ejson) and jiffy (https://github.com/davisp/jiffy)
instead of the format used by mochiweb/mochijson2. Most of the projects that
make heavy use of JSON seem to be moving to the format I'm suggesting.

Juanjo


On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 1:50 AM, Anton Lavrik <alavrik@REDACTED> wrote:

> Hi list,
>
> It is my pleasure to announce Erlson - a proof of concept
> implementation of dynamic dictionary data type. It can be best
> described by examples:
>
>    X = #{},  % create an empty dictionary
>
>    D = #{foo = 1, bar = "abc", fum},  % associate fields 'foo' with
> 1, 'bar' with "abc" and 'fum' with 'true'
>
>    1 = D.foo,  % access dictionary element
>
>    D1 = D#{baz = #{fum = #{i = 0}}},    % add nested dictionaries to
> dictionary D
>
>    0 = D1.baz.fum.i,     % access elements of the nested dictionary
>
>    D2 = D1#{baz.fum.i = 100, baz.fum.j = "new nested value"}. %
> modify elements of the nested dictionary
>    ...
>
>    erlson:to_json(D2).   % convert Erlson dictionary to JSON iolist()
>
>    D = erlson:from_json(Json).  % create Erlson dictionary from JSON
> iolist()
>    ...
>
>    D = erlson:from_proplist(L).     % create Erlson dictionary from a
> proplist
>
>    D = erlson:from_nested_proplist(L).  % create nested Erlson
> dictionary from a nested proplist
>
>
> Erlson implementation is fully working and includes syntax support,
> runtime library and rebar packaging. The source code is available on
> GitHub: https://github.com/alavrik/erlson
>
> Internally, Erlson dictionaries are represented as orddicts, i.e.
> ordered lists of {atom(), any()} pairs. This way, they can be easily
> printed, manipulated and  explored using conventional methods. For
> example, using the standard "orddict" and "proplists" libraries. It is
> also possible to define types for Erlson dictionaries and have them
> checked by Dialyzer.
>
> Erlson dictionary syntax can be used in both .erl modules and Erlang
> shell. Its implementation is based on a customized version of
> "erl_parse.yrl", which extends several grammar rules and overloads
> existing syntax elements used by Erlang records. Because there was no
> need to introduce new syntax elements, the implementation turned out
> to be quite simple.
>
> There is a catch, though. The current Erlson implementation is based
> on the original "erl_parse.yrl" from R14B03 release. This makes Erlson
> incompatible with other Erlang releases if they have a different
> version of "erl_parse.yrl".
>
> Although it would be easy to provide Erlson-enabled "erl_parse.yrl"
> version for every Erlang release, I was thinking about of a less hacky
> and more reliable solution. And this brings me to the question:
>
> Would it be useful if Erlson or some subset/superset of it became a
> part of the Erlang language? What do you think?
>
>
> Anton
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20110829/bd28f6f3/attachment.htm>