2 ms·
Except that's not what happened. They also had to define new syntax for the DSLs they embed in strings.
by wtetzner 6y ago
Except that's not what happened. They also had to define new syntax for the DSLs they embed in strings.
- pwdisswordfish6 6y agoTrue. But it would have been much harder if they had to define a syntax for the entire document. I imagine they thought that the path DSL is simple enough to parse (and I seem to vaguely recall PostScript has something similar), while the overhead of representing path nodes as XML elements would be too high.
- wtetzner 6y agoI'm not arguing against using an existing format, BTW, just seems like a weird mixture here. I can't help but think s-expressions would have been a better choice.