It might worth upgrading SJSMP into a full-scale RCP-protocol. In that case we need to support not only current primitive types and proposed enums (#5) but also arrays and composite types (structs/classes), and arrays of composite types.
For composite types we might need to specify list of types in a separate section of the schema. Like
For arrays I'd vote for some C-like syntax with int[] or rect[] so these could be declared inplace. Making explicit declaration in the types section would be pretty awkward, I think.
It might worth upgrading SJSMP into a full-scale RCP-protocol. In that case we need to support not only current primitive types and proposed enums (#5) but also arrays and composite types (structs/classes), and arrays of composite types.
For composite types we might need to specify list of types in a separate section of the schema. Like
For enums we could also use the explicit type declaration like
It would solve the naming problem from #5.
For arrays I'd vote for some C-like syntax with
int[]
orrect[]
so these could be declared inplace. Making explicit declaration in thetypes
section would be pretty awkward, I think.