From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,DNS_FROM_RFC_WHOIS,DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 939EABBAF for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 20:41:55 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AtICAKJhAEnAXQIngWdsb2JhbACTcAEBFiKmDIg9BQIBg0s X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,471,1220220000"; d="scan'208";a="18432672" Received: from concorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.39]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 23 Oct 2008 20:41:55 +0200 Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m9NIfsmJ028253 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 20:41:55 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: At4AAJNiAEnOvjGrkWdsb2JhbACTcAEBAQEJCwoHEQOmKYg9BQIBg0s X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,471,1220220000"; d="scan'208";a="30672977" Received: from web54601.mail.re2.yahoo.com ([206.190.49.171]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with SMTP; 23 Oct 2008 20:41:54 +0200 Received: (qmail 93383 invoked by uid 60001); 23 Oct 2008 18:41:53 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=yqZmjXdSI38OLS8XvYKPlXg/eY4ymlmnKJphlvC0sCQSo2bsDrElUw+DnVmE7AQ+WapRq25yd5evEMQ7QDcKVPQh7P72tJIlajT3ORpHA47sYWEr71Fhs+M5HzZC1ck2/niFvHDeOlaUUHNI/4GzMvG5Ge0ZGBTxUIIfL5L87bw=; X-YMail-OSG: xVqYzHYVM1ky1TQIHpyhJM9.nuQgYiA_W_GmJhypeH3_ry.WoG29EqW134KL8iM3_AcyCL3FwZKMeSkdryz1XYf804qq_fyCCBZF3aObVkdurKQ5nQxgg6L.McDwUqC4WQ2Obpv26dnrPl55Z8WxE4hfuSZfBdbopjTKoRJ2 Received: from [213.205.71.62] by web54601.mail.re2.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 11:41:52 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.7.247.3 Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 11:41:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Dario Teixeira Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Serialisation of PXP DTDs To: Markus Mottl Cc: caml-list@inria.fr MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <21135.93331.qm@web54601.mail.re2.yahoo.com> X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 4900C572.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; pxp:01 dtds:01 markus:01 syntax:01 trade-off:01 cheers:01 caml-list:01 data:02 readability:05 structure:07 question:13 however:13 prefer:16 use:16 thanks:17 Hi, > Bin-prot is settled in its design. We heavily rely on it here > at Jane Street and store TBs of data in it so there is no way > it's going to change. I would say it is future-proof. Thanks for the clarification, Markus, and I will take a closer look at bin-prot. One question, however: is it possible to use *both* the sexplib and bin-prot syntax extensions on the same structure? That way convenience for the developer is preserved, and users can choose which side of the performance vs readability trade-off they prefer. Cheers, Dario =0A=0A=0A