Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

new exercise: etl #195

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 4, 2025
Merged

new exercise: etl #195

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 4, 2025

Conversation

atk
Copy link
Contributor

@atk atk commented Apr 4, 2025

No description provided.

@atk atk requested a review from keiravillekode April 4, 2025 06:58
@keiravillekode
Copy link
Contributor

It would have been helpful to create an issue like
#164 #166 #167
so the input and output format could be discussed early.

If adding this exercise to another assembly language, I would look at how the exercise is expressed in C

I'm guessing everything is fine. I'll look at this PR more closely in a few days.

@atk
Copy link
Contributor Author

atk commented Apr 4, 2025

I explicitly started a general RFC about deserialization that you acknowledged, in which was clearly stated that objects will be serialized as JSON, especially since this the most likely solution in production.

Even if it was standalone, the data storage format is usually human-editable. JSON is a sensible choice in that regard, too.

@keiravillekode
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry, I missed that JSON line in your forum post.

@atk atk merged commit 0ab8cf0 into exercism:main Apr 4, 2025
5 checks passed
@atk atk deleted the etl branch April 4, 2025 19:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants