Fwd: [json] Re: new JSON encoder/decoder for Prolog
- Thank you for the explanation. In that case, it is much more precise
if it appears just as Ciao. This version of the library will
definitely not run as vanilla Prolog as it uses features only
available in the Ciao superset. Sorry for the confusion.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ben Atkin <ben@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 2:06 AM
Subject: [json] Re: new JSON encoder/decoder for Prolog
My understanding is that implementations are only to be listed once.
If they were listed twice for languages that were (near-)supersets of
other languages, all of the C implementations would be duplicated in
the C++ section. I think you ought to pick one section for it to
appear in, and I think that for now, listing it as Prolog is the best
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Jose F. Morales" <jfran@...> wrote:
> --- In email@example.com, "douglascrockford" <douglas@> wrote:
> > --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Jose F. Morales" <jfran@> wrote:
> > > Thank you very much for including the "Ciao JSON encoder and
> > > decoder" under the Prolog section. As a last request, we are
> > > wondering if we could have an additional entry for the "Ciao"
> > > language (Ciao is a new multiparadigm language which has Prolog as
> > > a subset). We are exactly in the same situation as Racket (whose
> > > JSON parser appears both under a specific entry for Racket and also
> > > under the more generic one for PLT-Scheme).
> > Do you want to be listed as Ciao or as Prolog?
> As both, since the library supports both Ciao and Prolog (similarly to
> the Racket/PLT-scheme library).