On 24 août 06, at 17:42, Bert Freudenberg wrote:

> Reading this I'm not sure everybody is aware of how the chunk  
> format works, because it actually is not declarative.

exactly this is why this can be a pain to perform some analysis on cs.

> The most annoying thing about that format is that you have to  
> double bangs in your code. Also, since one and the same symbol (!)  
> is used to mark start and end and separator, its hardly readable.

Exact

> But otherwise it's pretty much genius, allowing even to embed  
> binary data in your script (pretty much like a shell's "<<id" here- 
> document construct).
>
> So I imagine a similar construct could be used for a human-friendly  
> scripting syntax. I'd prefer to only add minimal syntax and let the  
> rest be handled by regular methods.

Yes but the syntax of pespi is cool too. :)

Even if I understand now what colin wanted to say about scripting or  
the fact that in ruby your code represent actions that will be  
performed when loaded, while a fileout (modulo class and doti) or a  
java program is more the result that is saved.

Stef