►
From YouTube: .NET Design Review: JSON & object graphs
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
So
basically,
it
starts
with
some
of
you
definitions
of
key
concepts
about
the
picture
by
the
terminology.
You
have
the
motivation
of
the
or
the
reasoning
of
why
we
are
trying
to
do
this.
The
actual
proposal,
the
API
proposal,
which
contains
the
surfaced,
API,
surface
description
of
the
options
that
we
are
offering
and
so
few
examples
and
another
free
or
art
that
we
were
checking
before
doing
this
and
some
basic
ground
rules
means
are
well
could
justification
of
why
we
decided
to
go
on
the
reaction.
Tell
you
it
is
a.
B
C
A
B
Okay,
so
basically,
there
are
three
concepts
here:
reference
loops,
which
is
simple,
simple
reference
to
maybe
the
same
object.
It
is
if
it's
a
direct
reference
or-
or
we
wanna
talk
to
another
of
it-
that
eventually
we
will
point
out
to
the
first
object,
so
if
I
will
get
into
it,
you
need
to
and
also
reference
loop.
It
can
be
caused
by
an
array
that
contains
itself
so
array
of
set
of
0
array
array
index
0
my
contain
self
right.
B
D
B
B
Okay,
so-
and
we
have
the
the
second
concept-
that
is
about
preserving
duplicated
duplicate,
references
which
is
like
represent
objects
over
a
race
that
have
been
previously
grater
and
grate
right
metadata
in
them
that
so
we
can.
We
can
reference
to
those
subjects
using
this
hidden
properties
right
now.
B
The
metadata
concept
is
that
so
many
layers
extra
properties
in
JSON
that
might
change
there's
their
schema,
which
means
by
changing
the
schema,
means
that
if
you
have
an
array
you
want,
if
you
want
to
change
that
to
a
preserve
array,
you
will
need
to
switch
the
semantics
to
a
date
that
the
array
property
now
holds
an
object
with
two
properties
which
is
one
I,
think
and
then
about
this
property
that
contains
the
actual
value
of
the
array.
This
can
be
easily.
This
can
be
more
easily
represented
with
I
mean
or
under
standard.
B
So
your
motivation
for
this
is
that
they
ring
out
there's
no
mechanism
to
about
infinite
loops
when
you
see,
like
the
net
objects,
the
contain
cycles
not
to
preserve
references
at
round
three,
the
grantee
when
using
system
to
casing
so
right
now
what
they
listen
to
the
lecture
does
is
that
throws
I,
guess
interception
when
a
loop
is
found
we
winning
the
object
graph.
This
is
because
there
is
evaluation
about
reaching
max
depth,
but
this
validation
does
not
precisely
tell
you
is
caused
by
a
loop
or
by
just
passing
a
relative
object.
B
Also.
The
other
secure
motivation
for
this
is
that
this
is
being
heavily
requested
by
the
community.
Insist
considered
by
many
has
a
very
common
scenario,
especially
when
you
are
'shy
allies
importance
that
came
from
on
our
ramp,
a
framework
like
EF
and
50
framebuffer
I,
also
keep
in
mind
that,
even
though
yes
and
I
speak
specification
does
not
support
reference
loops
by
default.
C
B
Right
yeah,
but
the
first
example
is
about
representing
how
you
see
that
I
said
works
right
now
and
to
demonstrate
that
in
swig
we'll
keep
working
Isis.
For
example,
if
you,
if
you
have
a
yeast
on
property
net
that
were
Christ
the
actual
property
name
of
the
of
the
of
the
class
of
the
class
property.
C
E
C
B
Yeah,
so
basically,
you
have
two
objects
of:
is
the
manager
and
he
likes
to
subordinate
when
you
try
to
see
lies
that
you
will
Google
opt
in
for
the
feature
by
enabling
the
reference
counting
by
passing
reference.
I'll
go
for
services
at
a
stock
protest,
a
static
property
on
the
class
and
and
you
Cal,
when
Cal
serialize,
you
get
the
the
output
from
below
I'm
just
here,
this
I
think
stand
like
a
feature
parity,
which
is
internet,
which
Newton
suggestion.
Now
you
get.
B
What
you
get
in
the
output
is
the
actual,
the
actual
objects
that
are
unattainable,
IDs
and
then
I
mean
every
complex
type
is
annotated
with
an
ID
right.
So
you
can
see
the
ID
one
or
Angela
daddy
to
for
Bob,
which
is
the
manager
of
Angela
for
the
subordinates.
You
see,
you
see,
object,
ID,
three,
because
it's
an
array
which
is
also
complex
type
and
on
the
values
of
the
object.
B
B
G
B
I
J
Never
had
it
come
up,
and
if
ever
did
my
advice
would
be
to
change
it
being
a
dictionary.
It's
more
likely.
You
could
get
dollar
sign
ID,
but
no
one's
no
one's
ever
ever
mentioned
it
occasionally.
I
get
requests
to
add
customization
to
be
able
to
change
these
built-in
identifiers
so
be
able
to
customize.
What
dollar
idea
is
to
be
some
other
value
and
I've
said
no.
Just
because
there's
a
limit
of
how
much
customization
you
can
have,
and
my
message
whenever
I
get
their
request
like
that
is.
C
It's
what
I
have
done
I
base
it
just
on
my
object
model
I
just
basically
have
a
callback
for
on
deserialization,
where
I
just
fixed
up
my
references
walking
from
the
top
down.
Yes,
then,
the
everything
that
contains
effectively
cycles
are
just
marketed
with
Jason,
even
one
that
works
reasonably
well.
K
C
B
Can
you
can
you
scroll
up
a
little
bit
because
we
are,
we
are
providing
a
scenarios
for
implementer
ignored
option,
but
we
don't
know
if
we
want
to
include
that
into
the
main
API
exposed,
because
no
one
is
really
tell.
We
don't
have
an
oven
from
enough
information
to
know.
This
is
really
requested
in.
C
C
My
case,
so
what
I've
done
is
that
I've
wrote
this
tooling
for
the
github.
You
know
org
security,
audit
right
and
so
what
what
getting
the
data
from
github
takes
time
so
I
saved
the
data,
so
I
can
do
offer
analysis
of
the
data
right.
But
if
you
wanted
like
analyze
github,
but
it's
super
convenient.
If
you
can
walk
up
to
a
team
and
then
get
to
the
children,
they
like
the
nested
team,
so
I
didn't
go
from
the
nested
team
back
to
the
parent
team
right.
C
D
An
object
website
is
very
useful.
I
was
just
wondering
if
you
know,
if
the
ideal
solution
to
the
problem,
if
I
want
to
serialize
some
object
graph,
it's
not
it's
something
like
a
binary.
She
realized
that
is
faster,
more
comparative
output,
as
object
graphs,
maybe
more
than
that
and
dollar
sign
IDs,
but
I
know
that
people
yeah.
C
I
would've
you
like
I,
would
probably
never
use
the
dollar
sign
mechanism.
I
would
call
it
just
makes
make
it
so
that
I
can
avoid
that
which
is
basically
doing
it
by
hand
all
this,
but
I
think
it's
nice.
If
you
can
just
turn
it
on
and
then
just
see
whether
you
like
it
like
I
mean
the
other
thing
to
keep
in
mind.
C
D
H
D
C
M
K
B
So
here
you
are
getting
the
degree
in
Java
that
you
broke
and
passing
it
to
the
DCL
I
said
buddies,
but
has
turned
turned
out
the
same
option
of
reserve.
Well,
when
you're
reading
you
see
allies,
you
get
you
and
and
check
for
the
other
check
for
the
ranks
on
it.
There
are
sign
properties
and
so
that
that
way
you
can
get
there.
You
can
store
the
references
to
use
them
later
and
so
they're.
On
the
contacts
on
and
example,
can
you
go
a
little
bit
down.
B
B
Another
thing
about
my
layering
is
that
owner
association
thesis
you
don't
need
to
opt
in
for
that.
It's
actually
it's
actually
turned
on
by
default,
but
you
know
what
you
don't
have
to
set
anything
up,
Northam
to
rate
to
start
to
read
metadata,
so
you
can
use
the
liaison
from
birth
this
year,
like
subject
matter
out
of
the
box,
and
it
can
under
references
while
on
our
case,
we
need
to
obtain
for
both
CLE
utilizing
a
meeting
palos
with
reference
with
preset
references
and
also
reading
paper
that
contains
memory.
B
Now
so
well,
I
also
added
a
few
examples
for
you
know,
which
is
for
the
troops
ho-oh.
We
are
skipping,
it's
like
a
Duke,
you
can.
You
can
color
like
I,
think
I'm,
dynamic,
yes
and
ignored,
which
is
in
charge
of
just
ignoring
things
that
you
already
saw
on
your
object
ranch.
If
you
had.
If
you
had
a
reference
look,
you
will
just
ignore
that
that
load
on
the
object.
B
Yeah
you
so
having
the
saying
having
the
same
scenario
where
you
have
Bob
and
in
your
when
you
try
to
feel
like
that
in
scroll
down
to
the
they'll,
be
there
you
know
you,
can
you
can
see
it
that?
Well,
you
don't
have
the
dollar
sign
a
properties,
but
you
you
do
you
have
something
different
that
is
said
on
the
subordinates,
which
is
supposed
to
hold
and
to
have
an
any
line.
Since
you
are
no,
you
now
not
don't
have
anything.
That
is
because
you
already
see
the
lies
and
EULA
right.
C
B
B
If
they
are,
if
they're
on
this
they're
older
properties
on
the
same
object,
they
both
will
get
here
lies
because
you
need
to
go.
You
need
to
go
back
in
this
in
the
stack
of
the
brain
and
on
the
branch
of
the
object
you
need
to
go
up,
which
is
a
stack.
Then
you
go
and
you
will
get
into
the
manager
too.
And
if
you
see,
if
you
use
your
another
reference
look,
then
you
will
cut
bounder
it
actively.
B
G
O
C
B
P
B
B
A
C
D
G
C
S
D
C
But
I
would
agree
with
you
that
it
seems
somewhat
lazy
to
me
because
I
mean
like.
If
that
is
your
scenario,
how
many
back
corners
can
you
possibly
have
in
the
schema?
That
must
be
a
very
small
number
of
properties
and
you
better
know
which
ones
they
are
and
so
I
would
probably
either
use
preserve
or
blow
up.
T
U
T
C
We
get
but
yeah
that
one
makes
more
sense,
though
right
because
most
of
the
time
when
you
exchanging
with
somebody
else,
but
if
addition
they
can
only
give
you
a
tree
in
json
schema
right.
So
I
would
only
have
the
back
pointers
for
convenience
in
the
object
model,
but
that
would
be
part
of
the
schema
right.
V
O
C
C
G
Ignore
this
is
a
good
pointer
to
Jamie
in
the
bottom.
Is
that
preserve
has
changed?
The
is
the
scheme
itself,
so
it
turns.
Are
raising
two
objects?
Yes,
so
if
you
had
converters,
you
have
some
code
that
relied
on
that
it
might
break,
and
you
like,
oh
wait,
we
like
it
I,
don't
want
this.
No
need,
if
is
I,
just
want
my
echoes
to
be
ignored
the
place
yeah.
Basically
you
you
mark
the.
D
H
But
if
you
know,
may-maybe
ignores
better
as
a
not
a
global
property,
but
as
a
her
serialization
option
like,
for
example,
you
might
have
a
type
like
a
link
like
system
collections,
link
list
that
you
want
to
serialize.
It
has
a
cycle,
but
you
don't
want
to
you.
Don't
care
about
the
back
pointers
in
that
case
and
you
don't
want
to
have
the
cycle,
in
which
case
you
would
say
for
this.
One
property
ignore
cycles
and
output.
G
C
Whether
the
data
make
sense
is
a
different
question,
but
attitude
to
me
that,
like
see
using
somebody
else's
types,
unless
they're
primitives
and
like
framework
supported
files,
I
think
is
generally
asking
for
trouble
because
you
take
somebody
else's
object,
you
make
it
part
of
your
schema,
you
don't
own
that
object,
they
can
add
properties
to
it.
They
can
change
the
way
with
them.
Things
represent.
C
Like
sharing
with
that
sure,
but
it's
same
thing,
I
get
like
if
I'm,
the
ESRI,
SDK
and
there's
some
random
framework
type.
You
know
in
you
kind
of
assumed
to
be
realizable
right,
I,
don't
know
assembly
name,
probably
not
right.
I
mean
I
mean
maybe
list
of
t
or
collections.
You
would
also
expect
to
just
work
right,
but
I
think,
generally
speaking,
if
you
have
your
own
custom
things
and
you
either
just
still
has
them
as
strings,
and
you
come
up
with
your
own
custom
formula
for
those
things,
because
otherwise
you
don't
control
it
doesn't.
G
O
Can
use
the
converter
and
you
could
do
your
own
if
you
know
when
you
go
in
and
out
of
the
object,
because
you
can
do
the
stack
walk
yourself.
That's
the
same.
I
go
but
we're
about
to
go
recursive
so
like
it's
not
as
convenience
is
running
down
the
door,
but
it
shows
a
heck
of
a
lot
more
intent.
I've
been
writing
down.
How.
C
S
H
B
Yeah
we
thought
of
that.
Actually
newtons
of
those
have
an
API
that
exposes
in
the
compare.
So
you
can
access
to
the
map
or
the
dictionary
calls
all
the
auto
references
and
we
were
thinking
of.
Maybe
we
can
add
that
and
a
future
converter,
but
yeah
we're
planning
I
mean
the
main
purpose.
For
this
to
be
a
type
is
that
we
can
extend
you
whatever
Howard
as
long
as
we
want
so
yeah
we're.
We
were
playing
on
exposing
this
reference
coming
to
the
converters,
so
people
can
interact
with
the
reference
that
we
are.
G
G
C
C
I
mean
it
depends
on
what
do
you
mean
by
that
right?
Excellent,
for
example,
let's
say
let's
say
the
the
ABMS
test
case
right,
where
the
only
thing
I
have
is
back
pointers
right
neck
bones
are
not
part
of
the
schema
I
just
made
them
up
in
my
own
object
model.
So
if
I
say
you
can
or
they
just
don't
get
to
your
lives
right,
but
it,
but
now,
let's
say
I
am
duplicated
instances
in
an
array
right
now.
I
would
just
like
write
them
out
at
individual
values.
C
D
O
Where
any
note
you
see
really,
you
have
C
realized
the
entire
list,
because
until
it
actually
hits
the
cycle,
it's
gonna
say.
Oh,
my
previous
or
choice
whichever
one
well
first
is
this
guy?
Is
this
guy?
Is
this
guy?
So
if
you
use
ignore-
and
you
pick
anything
in
the
MS
gal,
you
see
realize
the
entire
company,
unless
you
then
go
mark
like
oh
I,
don't
want
to
actually
walk
up
or
down
or
I
would
like
all
of
the
things
where
a
person
reference
is
another
person
like
you,
don't
want
the
ignore
feature.
C
I
mean
it
depends
on
like
where
you
start
right.
I
mean
like
usually
what
you
end
up
doing
is
you're
still
adding
from
some
object
out
right
like
that
that
not
logically
right
and
the
rule
usually
has
a
back
corner
of
now
right.
So
you
know
you're,
not
necessarily
walking
out
of
the
thing
you're
usually
walking
down.
That's
what
I'm
saying
for
the
most
part,
I
think
cycles
come
from
the
fact
that
you
have
some
sort
of
parent
property
right,
which
is.
D
C
The
only
cases
where
I've
ever
seen
like
these
kind
of
things
is
basically
when
you
have
when
you
have
a
tree
right
and
you
over
still
has
the
entire
tree.
Hey,
there's
no
point
2000
parts
of
the
tree,
but
then
every
known
as
a
parent
because
of
of
conveniens
in
my
object
model,
but
like
clearly
they're
implied
by
the
structure
of
the
tree,
already
all
right
so
there
and
on
any
new
information.
C
O
C
I
understand
that
all
I'm
saying
is
that
you
don't
do
that,
but
I've
never
seen
a
case
where
you
serialize
from
that.
No
don't
worry.
You
usually
have
some
sort
of
object
where
you
have
the
entire
tree
and
then
what
you're
pointing
towards
the
root
in
the
tree
and
the
root
has
a
parent
of
now
I
didn't
so
like.
But
you
still
see.
C
Can
look
at
the
data
and
you
can
say
you
know
what
what
would
this
result
in
right.
So
in
that
sense,
I
think
it's
not
so
I
think
ignore
it's
a
bad
policy.
However
I
think
it
is
a
policy.
I
can
reason
about,
and
I
would
say
that
to
me,
switching
from
ignore
to
preserve
seems
weird
I
would
probably
switch
from
ignore
to
I
sprinkle
attributes
of
Jason
ignore
over
my
back
pointers
and
that's
how
I
deal
with
that
and
then
I
would
just
let
it
blow
up
for
cases
where
I
have
seconds.
Oh,
but.
G
We
had
landed
on
that.
You
do
not
have
a
door
right
now.
Do
you
not
enable
it-
and
you
have
you
just
requested,
based
on
the
first
person
right
and
based
on
that
add
it
back
pain,
part
of
not
having
it
is
anyone
who
try
to
quote
code
that
uses
ignore
today
and
it
works
if
they
don't
have
the
I'll
have
to
annotate
types
and
many
cases
they
can't,
for
example,
the
system
exception.
G
O
Serializing
exception
who
in
the
world
is
throwing
an
exception
that
they
said
bro
or
exception
e
equal
new
exception,
throw
new
exception
message:
comma
E,
like
no
cuz,
that
he
doesn't
even
do
it
like
you
can't
make
an
exception
in
referencing,
so
I
think
it's
just
an
exception,
merit
type
in
their
construction.
My
cameras,
I,
couldn't.
H
Hey
yeah
I
mean
a
completely
valid
case,
would
be
you're
doing
remote
debugging
you
catch
the
exception
on
the
remote
machine.
You
want
to
serialize
it
in
Jason
or
attend
it
back
across
the
wire,
in
which
case
you
may
not
care
about
the
cycle.
You
just
want
to
return
the
message
and
the
name
in
which
case
it
just
having
an
easy
way
to
annotate
ignore
the
cycle
here
would
but
there's
a
because
the
exception
died.
Parent.
O
B
I
D
C
Mean
I
think
I'm
in
favor
of
saying
breaking
cycles
right.
The
better
I
would
not
use
a
global
hammer
like
that.
I
would
say,
like
you
apply
that,
because
I
mean,
if
you
define
your
schema,
you
better
know
what
your
cycles
are
like
I
mean
like
this,
because,
first
of
all,
as
soon
as
you
say,
don't
see
let's
this
thing
well,
but
you
serve
the
property
in
the
object
model,
so
you
still
assume
it's
being
set
somewhere
at
some
point
in
your
code.
You
better
initialize
this
guy
right,
and
so
where
is
that?
Alright?
C
C
C
Do
that,
but
I
would
say
that
to
me
the
fix
for
that
is
no.
The
person
has
to
either
really
wide
this
utilizer.
For
that,
that's
right,
the
converter
for
it
or
you
just
map
your
own
vibes,
like
I,
think
the
idea
that
we
need
to
build
a
cylinder
that
can
make
arbitrary
time
from
arbitrary
parties,
I
would
surely
compose
is
what
civilization
was
so
complicated,
and
so
error-prone
I
would
I
would
just
say:
I
would
not
sort.
C
D
Like
would
you
say,
hey,
you
know
we
cannot
deserialize
because
we
are
missing
in
128.
Well,
we're
gonna
just
see
the
last
64
days.
Maybe
it's
good
enough.
I
mean
this
is
almost
the
same
like
we,
you
know
like
there's
an
object
graph.
It
has
that
danger
and
we
are
saying
we're.
Gonna
skip
some
of
the
data,
but
it's
better
to
serialize
something
than
nothing
yeah.
O
D
A
tree
and
I
kind
of
can
imagine,
but
then
you
know
you
pointed
out
that
you
try
to
see
the
like
this.
You
know
suction.
Then
you
had
a
problem,
but
you
know
tree
kind
of
humans
can
understand
that
it
has
some
order
right,
but
anything
else
like
a
sink.
You
are,
you
know
circular
buffer
like
well.
What
does
it
mean?
We're
gonna
skip
the
last
thing,
maybe
never,
which
I'm
very
happy
today,
Porsche
yeah
yeah
I
mean.
C
O
C
Thing
I
would
say
that
was
like.
If
we
tell
people
instead
of
doing
ignore
or
preserve
you
know,
do
it
yourself,
I
think
the
one
thing
that
people
would
probably
want
to
submit
civilization,
thee
civilization
call
back,
so
they
can
have
a
way
to
wire
in
the
logic
to
page
of
the
references.
But
you
would
probably
do
what
your
would
object
and
then
walk
from
there
yeah,
but
right
now,
I
do
manually,
but
I
should.
C
C
Y
President
met
my
asking
us
to
hold
questions.
I
For
a
few
minutes,
but-
and
this
is
where
Jeremy
is
actually
going
to
send
me-
daggers
through
the
phone
one
of
the
things
that
JSON
dotnet
allows-
is
they
actually
have
support
for
I
serializable,
including
calling
get
object,
data
and
calling
the
special
serialization
detected
constructor?
If
you
have
a
feature
like
that,
all
of
a
sudden
serializing
references
becomes
a
lot
more
powerful,
because
those
two
features
play
off
with
each
other
quite
well.
I
think.
I
D
I
O
I
O
I
I
I
Z
C
G
G
B
So,
for
for
preserve
and
on
find
reading,
payloads
its
following
step,
yeah
by
a
row
by
a
rule
of
thumb,
we
want
to
draw
on
all
the
case
on
almost
all
the
cases
were
the
educated
being
read
some
things
metadata.
That
is
impossible
to
create
with
our
own
serializer
like
so
it
means
that
it
might
be
before
it
was
potentially
hard
modifying.
B
Some
examples
now
for
the
reference
of
yet
you
might
want.
You
want
to
state
that
if
you
have
a
lot
of
saying
ref,
you
cannot
have
well.
Let
me
go
so
if
you
have
a
ref,
a
reference
object,
which
is
the
old
erase
dollar
sign,
ref,
ID
and
then
our
coup
de
grâce.
If
you
have
a
regular
property
before
ref,
you
want
to
throw
that's
because
you
don't
want
to
you
want
to
share
that
object
with
any
other
kind
of
property.
On
the
same
case,
you
hover
over
perfect.
B
B
That's
trying
to
read
it
just
trying
to
be
parsed,
so
so
they
so
they
do
set
up
different
rules
like
like,
for
example,
if
the
ref
comes
after,
if
you
would
automatically
all
the
metadata
will
be
ignored.
Things
like
that
would,
and
on
our
case
wait.
We
don't
want
to
do
that.
We
just
want
to
throw
this
realize.
D
G
O
If
manager
was
a
type
other
than
whatever
the
word
object
is
and
then
had
a
property
that
was
either
named
dollar
sign
graph
and
I
L
or
it
was
to
be
dollar
sign,
rep
on
the
wire,
and
we
will
write
this
and
in
Google
unless
I
mean
alright.
We
may
fail
to
write
this
because
we
would
say
I'm
about
to
write
an
illegal
object.
Oh
you,
like
you
need
to
go
change
the
name
of
this
thing
because,
like
we're
bogus
now
what
you
needed,
I.
H
G
Z
G
I
O
B
C
B
On
the
example
of
the
bottom,
if
you
might
have
a
two
of
this
wear,
when
you
wear
your
your
pointer
to
the
object,
is
before
to
the
object
simply
so,
if
you
try
to
DC
a
lighter
there,
the
reference
that
is
on
the
top,
you
will
get
unknown.
That
is
because,
when
you,
when
you
are
resolving
the
reference,
you
couldn't
find
anything.
Q
O
O
I
B
O
O
You
had
conversation
about
racism
if
it's
in
an
array,
it
is
ordered
properties,
the
unordered,
but
the
only
way
that
you
can
make
it
like
the
way
that
you
would
make
it
work
and
is
to
do
multi
pacification
if
you
want
to
do
multi
pass
evaluations,
so
it
can
only
have
you
can't
have
forward
records.
So
do
you
ever
see
a
forward
reference?
The
document
is
invalid.
B
K
B
For
it
with
the
senator
getting
me
to
say,
yeah,
we
might
want
to
throw
in
every
case.
That
is
not
that
is
about,
but
just
to
intimidate
them,
particularly
you
might.
You
might
also
have
that
you
have
at
least
are
about
love
on
the
same
object.
We
want
to
tell
you
which,
which
does
not
work,
the
same
way,
your
nearest
off,
because
some
yourself,
what
happens
that
the
last
one
wins.
AA
B
E
K
B
One
they
want.
The
second
example
is
about
well
yeah.
We
don't
want
to
write,
we
will
not.
We
will
not
ever
write
this
year,
but
it
might
happen
that
if
you
have
a
heart
of
the
Galilee,
so
you're
still
talking
you
if
you
find
two
objects
that
contain
the
same,
doesn't
think
the
same.
The
share
the
ad.
C
O
I
Even
like
regex
aside,
it
sounds
like
mo.
You
were
talking
about
the
scenario
where
I
serialized
standalone
object,
graph,
a
which
might
define
its
own
IDs
standalone
object,
graph
B,
which
might
use
those
same
identifier,
because
it
itself
is
also
standalone
and
then
I
create
the
text
open
square
bracket,
the
representation
of
object,
a
comma,
the
representation
of
object,
B,
close
square
bracket,
and
now
I
cannot
deserialize
out.
I
O
Thing
that
looks
like
an
enum
enum
and
it
becomes
open
extensible
later
than
would
write
it
yourself
with
a
it
asks
like.
What's
the
next
ID
I
should
use
when
I
get
a
thing
change
the
formula
from
in
stuck
or
I,
plus
plus,
not
to
string
to
maintain
the
same
thing
for
the
whole
operation
or
you
give
it
a
prefix
or
no.
D
H
Is
a
serialize
or
you
use
the
Dom
to
combine
two
graphs
together
waiting
that
would
not
handle
it
either.
What
is
it
I
mean?
So
they'd
all
can
write
it.
It's
easy
realize
you
can't
read
it
right,
and
so
the
Dom
would
be
writing
in
it.
It
means
that
the
Dom
wouldn't
handle
references.
There
probably
needs
to
be
a
way
to
say
I'm,
combining
two
separate
I
to
separate
graphs.
There
implements.
C
D
C
U
O
D
G
C
C
C
B
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
on
the
first
paragraph,
so
how
we
are
ending
the
semantics
of
the
erase,
so,
for
example,
you
have
the
regular
arrays
wrapped
with
square
braces.
You
have
a
lemon
go
element
to
element
tada,
and
you
know
on
a
preserved
array.
It's
writen
on
the
next
parliament,
which
is
instead
of
having
the
spar
braces.
You
have
the
curly
braces
that
now
contains
two
properties
dollars
nad
and
dollars
and
values.
Now,
why
do
we,
whatever
you
had
on
there?
Whatever
you?
B
B
They
must
be
the
only
property
on
the
object,
the
ID
with
the
body
under
the
condition
that
is
gonna,
be
there
the
property
it
is
going
to
be
the
first
property
on
the
object
round
and
and
values
is
dollar
stimulus
is
not
valued,
however
dollar
and
sign
whatever
is
valid,
because
it's
gonna
be
easy,
still
deny.
We
consider
different
property.
That
is
not
part
of
my
area.
O
B
Okay,
okey
now
is
that
when
we
see
when
we
are
selecting
it,
we
what
we
were
we
were
discussing
earlier
Lister
if
you
find
this
ID
or
sanity's
alexandroff
as
key
names
on
a
dictionary
when
you
see
realize
that
you
will
have
an
Inuit
or
opting
for
the
Purcell
feature,
you
will
get
a
round
trip
in
issues,
because
now
you
are
overlapping
properties.
You
are
ever
lucky.
If
you
have
a
key
words
which
was
there
was
anything
and
you
are
sort
of
in
unity.
Now
you
have
two
edges.
AA
O
Yeah
hello,
they
tell
me
liters
already
expensive,
you're
doing
in
squared
reference
equality
asking
a
couple
of
strings
that
ever
they
bring
ID
or
even
graph
and
value
up
high.
They
are
they're
cheap
compared
to
the
rest
of
this
week.
What
do
you
bet
to
have
to
throw
on
TC
relief?
Because
now
you
wrote
it,
and
now
you
can't
read
it,
that's
much
harder
to
diagnose
of
where
the
but
be
clear,
though,
that
you
this.
H
G
O
Our
format,
so
the
thing
is,
though,
you're
in
preserve
mode.
We
can
do
whatever
y'all
open
up.
What
about.
G
G
J
People
have
requested
the
ability
I
bought
us
up
before
people
have
have
requested
the
ability
to
customize
what
dollar
ID
dollar
reef
and
dollar
values
are,
so
they
could
customize
ourselves
underscore
underscore
ID,
but
there's
usually
in
the
context
of
they
want
to
work
with
a
different
serialize
er,
which
users
slightly
different
they'll
use
their,
but
having
conflicts
inside
a
collection.
That's
not
a
issue
I've
ever
ever
seen.
Iii
can
see
how
it
could
happen
it
just
it
hasn't.
Come
up.
O
C
O
Like
you
want
a
hierarchy
also
asking
is
this
use.
Is
this
written
in
kanji
and
you
need
to
ask
like
we're
running
everything
you're
doing
so
much
work
like
asking?
Is
this
equal
to
dollar
sign
ID
length
is
three:
it's
exactly
these
characters.
That's
free
compared
to
everything
else,
you're
doing
to.
O
It
some
cubers
yeah,
but
that's
also
but
they're,
all
like
it's.
You
have
three
key
words
you're
doing
exactly
that.
Many
character
matches
like
compared
to
the
reference
equality
mapping
that
you're
doing
yeah
compared
to
the
dictionary
you're
growing.
Every
time
you
add
a
new
reference
things
yeah
compared
to
the
all.
The
Unicode
is
escaping
that
you're
doing
because
you're
going
out
of
the
like
that,
if
is
not
metal
I.
C
Mean
one
check
is
very
cheap,
but
basically
you
don't
have
to
check
against
these.
You
know
three
or
four
properties.
You
only
have
to
say,
doesn't
start
with
a
dollar
sign
in
mind.
This
mode,
then
escape
I
mean
you
can
make
this
vert
of
the
cheap.
You
don't
have
to
compare
the
whole
stream
against
ID
ravages.
Let
me
you
can.
O
G
O
Day
that
you,
because
if
you
you
say
right
now,
everything
that
starts
with
a
dollar
sign
you're
going
to
place
the
leading
dollar
sign.
You
can
now
grow
your
feet.
If
you,
if
you
say
these,
are
the
only
three
reserved
keywords
and
forgive
each
other.
Well,
all
those
things
that
you've
used
all
your
words
before
any
key.
That's
not
endorsing
right
again!
You
can!
You
can
throw
if
you
see
any
dollar
sign
or
you
can
turn
into
violation
whatever.
Well.
P
I
O
We
write
down
the
reference
ID
and
then
either
the
ID
for
lookup
or
the
ID,
or
turn
this
back
into
a
pointer
when
we're
done
or
the
values
in
direction
for
a
like
yeah.
Those
are
when
we're
in
writing
and
preserve
mode
when
we're
reading
in
preserve
know
those
are
very
special.
Yeah
writing
a
preserve
mode
me
put
ourselves
in
ill
map,
so.
G
To
me,
as
Levi
was
pointing
out,
I
would
rather
be
more
consistent
with
the
entire
stack
rather
than
having
preserved
me.
This
whole
thing.
The
reason
why
we
were
in
this
state
is
because
I
thought
that
I
would
be
too
aggressive
to
say,
let's
throw
for
all
keys
the
strong
dollar
sign,
yada
oranges,
for
these
three
reserve
keepers
is
not
accessible.
G
Actually,
if
you
add
another
one,
so
door
type
type
doors
and
types:
okay,
if
you,
if
you
don't
throw
now
and
I'm
suggesting,
is
if
you're
gonna
throw
so
for
all
kids
on
our
side,
I,
don't
defend
escaping
because
I
change
in
the
reading
side
will
be
now
saying:
hey
look,
gods
escape
door
side
is
not
really
a
mess,
no
escape
door.
Sighs.
H
H
So
you
can
say
everything
starting
with
a
dollar
sign
is
reserved,
and
if
you
have
a
dollar
sign,
it
has
to
be
escaped
and
if
it's
the
first
character,
yes
yeah,
yeah
and-
and
so
then
you
you've
got
it
you,
you
can
cleanly
say
we
reserved
the
actual
dollar
sign
and
observer
mode
for
anything.
We
want
so
you're,
never
going
to
have
a
competitive.
You
just
say
if
your
preserve,
after
escape.
J
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
you
need
a
throw
or
escape
all
dollar
signs
I.
It's
really
just
these
three
special
property
values
which
have
meaning,
and
at
least
within
jacent
on
it,
they've
been
stable
and
the
only
free
special
property
values
used
with
this
picture.
If
different
features
require
different
special
dollar
dollar
metadata
values,
then,
when
you
enable
those
that
that
those
features,
then
you
could
decide
to
start
throwing
with
them,
but
I
think
at
least
within
the
preserve
reference
feature.
These
three
are
probably
the
only
three
you
would
ever
need
you.
J
J
G
C
Saying
I
think
the
argument
is
always
opt
into
this
feature
like
a
dollar
sign.
Random
string
is
never
a
keyboard
unless
you
switch
the
civilizer
into
the
voter
disk
or
the
supporting
the
only
problem
that
I
had
with.
That
is
that
it
makes
it
relatively
hard
to
reason
about
your
dictionary
keys
right
because,
like
you,
just
because
you
opt
in
to
not
want
to
see
lies
sometimes
doesn't
mean
I
get
to
change
all
my
dictionary
keys
right.
C
H
L
H
Than
having
to
conceptualize
well
now
we
have
to
add
contextual
keywords,
or
now
we
have
to
figure
out
how
to
do
this
compatibly.
It's
just.
We
have
one
clear
rule
which
is
if
you're
in
the
special
mode
to
escape,
that's
also
cheaper
to
check,
because
you
don't
have
to
say
if
it's
any
of
these
keyboards,
you
just
say:
if
the
first
character
is
dollar,
fine,
then
escape
otherwise
don't
and
most
most
cases
will
will
say
false,
and
so
the
branch
predictor
on
the
CPU
will
keep
that
basically
zero
awesome.
So.
Q
B
O
B
What
I
meant
is
that
this
per
I
mean
on
the
on
the
on
the
ground
rules.
We
thought
that
the
race
is
is
now
change,
semantically
to
an
octave
right
with
telephone,
ID
and
dollars
in
value,
which
also
that
that
object
can
also
have
a
doors
and
roof
to
another
right,
but
weren't
wearing
chains
here
is
that
only
those
three
properties
are
valid
with
him.
That
of
semantic
began.
B
Putting
that
object
for
a
fryer
for
an
innumerable
and
any
other
kind
of
property
that
I
start
with
our
sign
is
not
valid,
but
it's
true
for
any
object.
We
already
know
because
for
objects
that
are
third
that
are
not
preserved,
there
are
no
preserved
erase.
Is
it
is
funky?
Well,
it
was
about
a
moment
ago.
I
guess.
B
So
basically,
it's
because
I
mean
the
main.
The
main
point
of
this
is
because,
since
I
we
are
the
ones
writing
the
the
Purcell
arrays.
We
are
only
expecting
dollars
and
reflects
an
idea
endorsed
and
others
are
perfectly
right.
No
one
else
is
where
you
can
have
four
separate.
No
one
else
is
representing
my
mother
is
a
napkin
right
can
ask
we
made
at
the
main
FB
object
in.
B
O
O
I
think
you
will
have
an
ambiguity
that
you
that
needs
to
be
worked
out
of.
If
you
have
and
again
it's
back
to
the.
If
you
have
a
property
that
you
said
that
the
wire
serialized
name
of
it
either
become
il
directly
or
you
put
the
base
in
me
or
you
know
the
f-sharp
don't
collapse,
or
you
use
that
word.
If
it's
going
to
itself
right
now,
a
thing
that
says:
dollar
ref
and
there
you
have
it
a
valid
construct,
an
object
inside
your
the
values
that.
B
B
These
types
are
a
limitation
for
the
Buddha
feature,
because
holes
are
created
with
the
help
of
an
entire
camera,
so
they
are
not
partial
to
the
entire
block
of
the
Haysom
finishes
parsec,
which
means
that
in
univille
tapes
are
not
available
until
you've
finished
with
the
block.
So,
for
example,
if
you
have
our
and
moon
oval
array
that
contains.
D
O
O
C
G
S
Y
O
S
H
O
Yeah,
it
is,
it
still
seems
like
if
you,
if
you
produce
the
thing
what
you
should
have
said
like
on
deserialize
what
he
was
putting
your
type
map
for
the
thing
that
ended
up
saying
it
was
ID.
Here
is
immutable.
Dictionary
like
that's.
What's
in
the
map,
when
you
call
try
get
value,
it's
an
immutable
dictionary
sign
it
again.
It's
now
where
I
can
see
cooler
at
will
different
reference.
It
cool
and
I
go
I'm,
not
understanding
where
the
problem
is,
unless
you're
talking.
G
C
O
B
I
Could
I
could
I
do
something
like
so
you
know
how
right
now
we
have
these
syntax
for
for
serializing
and
referencing
our
ways.
So
what
is
it
like?
Open,
open,
curly,
ID,
:,
one
comma
dollar
sign
values
:
the
array
right
yeah
have
to
open
curly
ID
:,
one
comma
dollar
sign
values:
:
some
string
correct,
like
I.
Can't
I
can't
use
that
to
make
a
referenceable
string.
No,
no
okay.
G
U
D
No
yeah,
yes,
there's
actually
calm.
I
can
imagine
you
have
a
on
one
side
that
you
have
a
graph.
There
is
some
breakfast
ice
and
you
dissonant
lies
on
the
other
side
and
we
use
our
new
types
for
some
of
the
object.
Yeah,
but
you're
gonna
end
up
with
a
different
thing,
so
that's
their
loss.
Enos.
It's
very
similar
to
me
to
this.
You
know
feature
to
ignore
references.
Basically,
it
will
ignore
reference
on
the
other
seven.
Are
you
happy?
Never
pull
it
out
of
the
dictionary
middle
silence,
yeah!
Well,
you're,
not
gonna.
D
Have
you
know
if
you
follow
it
like
somebody
implemented
a
tree
and
had
cycles
and
back
pointers
like
in
the
emos
example,
and
then
you
disable
eyes
to
a
tree
where
the
nodes
were
value
types?
Well,
you
know
like
command
that
when
basically
you
gonna
lose
data,
it's
a
data,
corruption.
We
shouldn't
be
doing
so.
What
should
we
not
do?
We
should
not
in
May
I.
R
O
M
O
D
G
G
I
can
one
side
and
you
happen
to
have
backwards.
We
have
references,
you
a
Maitre,
the
doors
and
rap
here
on
DC
lies.
If
you
have
straps,
you
see
a
boss
and
life
you
throw
that
straightest
behavior,
but
you
have
what
you're
proposing
is
if
we're
adding
doors
and
IDs
on
the
class.
Later
you
have
no
consciousness,
there's
regular
class
and
see
what's
fine,
but
you
add
VMA
doors,
idea
of
reserve
and
he's
greasy
lies
struck
it.
He
wants
to
throw
for
that
as
well.
I
see.
D
O
G
O
I
O
G
G
L
B
Okay,
so
the
proposal
is
just
one
single
option,
for
that
is
that
I
started
on
Jason
the
alleged
options
I,
which
is
of
Tiger
reference,
handling
and
way.
I'll
start
exposing
the
reference
handling
class
and
in
that
class
would
contain
at
least
four
for
shipping
that
default
and
preserve
static
properties,
but
it
would
represent
of,
but
that
we
represented
it
called
a
veer
and
there
exists
no,
because
for
extensibility
on
the
future.
The
official
contains
a
lot
of
like
small
bits
that
at
my
that
are
available
on
the
internet.
B
O
Okay,
I
can
see
either
way.
Okay,
the
question
is:
do
you
expect
you
expect
that
in
the
next
version
you're
going
to
me
especially
yes,
have
you
expect
oh
I
see
hi?
Do
you
think
you
that
there
is
a
world
where
you
could
it's
if
you
believe
that
my
version
sticks
o-net
that
you
will
have
made
this
extensible,
then
class
now
makes
sense
if
you
think
well,
if
a
lot
of
people
ask
for
a
lot
of
complicated
things
than
meeting.
G
F
G
G
O
C
You
can
always
construct,
you
know,
no
legal
components
when
you
combine
that
with
your
features
of
everything,
but
at
the
same
time,
if
you
express
everything
as
a
custom
slides-
and
you
end
up
with
complicated
things,
but
you
main
in
principle,
we
could
also
have
different
innovators.
That
just
say
property
preserve.
That.
G
G
G
I
G
G
D
G
D
D
D
D
G
Another
has
three
items
all
right:
Maya
did
our
property
handling
that
first
loop
handling
happens
of
references.
Okay
and
those
three
enums
have
different
values:
Oh
may
I
did
I,
it
has
the
capability
for
read,
ahead,
has
ignored
and
it
process
product
or
some
handing
it
as
T
values,
ignore
I'm,
saying
error
and
see
allies
and
preserving
references.
It
has
more
options,
preserve
them
for
everything
know
preserve
them,
so
only
four
objects
present,
for
it
is
but
this
matrix
of
features
that
we
have.
G
AB
G
My
only
fear
with
an
enum
is
that
on
the
table
even
discussed
a
flags,
you
know
that
I
won't
extend
or
all
of
those
things
that
we
are
purposely
scoping
out
as
uncommon
and
not
necessary,
and
also
it
done
extend.
The
capabilities
like
I
want
to
customize
only
see
how
they
should
be
here,
but
leave
this
shall
be
here
or
something
different.
Although
me
understand
that
yeah
enum
doesn't
scale
right
in.
D
Itself,
yeah,
but
you
know
a
separate
property
in
that,
like
if
you
said
this
enum
value
to
this
one,
you
might
to
specify
this
other
property.
Otherwise
we
throw
you,
as
you
know,
wrong
combination
of
options
yeah
or
we
keep
it
as
a
class,
but
then
you
can
instantiate
it
and
you
can
send
them
to
the
constructor
in
the
future.
We
have
crappy
and
the
third
option
is
design
what
you
think
it
should
be
in
the
future,
because
I
also
did
that's.
When
you
did
it
and
then
we
carry
the
design
of.
G
R
D
R
D
AB
G
D
U
G
B
O
G
You
because
I
mean
it's
a
class,
so
it's
not.
O
O
R
D
G
So
emo,
but
you
have
the
only
difference
between
what
you
have
now.
What
we
have
is
nine,
nine
and
that's
just
rots
point.
Is
it
well
he's
a
bit
because
they
would
see
a
class
like
I,
won't
knew
it
out.
There's
no
reason
to
expose
nine
eleven
find
it
expand
and
it
also
looks
like
if
you
don't
have
the
constructor
is
like.
Why
did
you
write.
C
O
H
Q
S
F
X
R
H
A
H
C
But
everything
for
one
it
makes
no
difference
to
me
like
I.
Think
one
is
fine,
but
fall
under
the
head
and
address
to
care.
Was
that
they're,
like
eight
or
something
right,
but
I,
think
the
question
is
like
for
this
kind
of
thing.
What
is
your
extensibility
scenario
right?
If
you
want
to
introduce
a
completely
different
plane
of,
like
preserve
references,
mean
a
different
parameter
anyway,
and
that
point
you
also
need
a
different
enum,
at
which
point
you
just
duplicating
types.
At
that
point.
H
C
G
G
C
But
I'm
saying
it's
hard
for
me
to
reason
about
this
thing
in
the
way
you
describe,
because
I
have
to
look
at
the
actual
type
and
looking
at
the
constructors
and
like
what
things
can
you
do
on
this
type
that
are
actually
valid
like?
What
can
you
call?
What
would
you
over
I
about?
Would
you
pass
in
right
and
like
that
seems
like
the
details
of
this
design
manner,
whether
they're
next
sense
or
not,
and
to
me
like
it
seems
almost
as
wishy-washy
as
saying?
O
D
L
D
U
O
O
K
V
V
C
O
C
G
L
G
S
C
D
C
D
I
still
don't
like
anybody
would
ever
use
default
in
our
program.
We
just
added
property,
that's
literally
useless,
you
might
never
use
it.
So
I
would
also
remove
the
preserve
and
just
have
the
first
time
if
we
think
that
we're
gonna
be
having
these
features
in
the
future,
because
it
basically
creates
a
time
that
corresponds
to
and
of
a
combination
of
work
can
be
done
today
and
how.
O
G
So
clearly,
there's
concerns
with
this.
An
enum
would
be
solved
for
sort
of
today,
I'm
fine
with
it
being
you
know,
and
I
just
have
the
two
values:
man
you
are
having
a
default.
Is
that
it's
your
position
to
document
what
the
default
behavior
is
also
like.
We
have
similar
concern
with
Jess
and
any
policy.
Every
Dane
explore
the
default
and
be
interpreted
model
to
mean
one
before
behavior
is
internally
in
the
ability
dieter.
G
C
Honestly,
like
I
go
back
to
this,
it's
like
I
will
just
make
it
an
enum,
and
if
you
really
need
to
customize
behavior,
then
you
better
just
have
a
very
simple
thing,
which
is
like
either
you've
seen
them
for
the
very
simple
case
or
you
construct
this
complicated
object
in
your
past
and
settings.
You
want
just.
O
D
D
O
G
O
And
then
you
need
more
complicated
things.
Then
you
move
to
a
now.
I
have
a
more
complicated
one.
You
know
you
don't
need
for
enums
if
you
can't
express
it
into
a
glass
table
like
this
describes
this
behavior,
then
it's
like
that
guy
you
get
to
define
your
own.
What
IDs
are
using
is
to
find
your
own
equality.
You
just
define
whatever
you
want.
We
don't
care,
you
can
find
it.
No.
C
But
I
think
his
point
was
that
you've,
water,
which
is,
if
you
look
at
Jason
net
yeah,
it
is
a
fuckton
of
configuration
options
right
and
we
keep
chasing
it
I
know,
and
so
the
question
is:
are
we
ever
done
or
I'll
be
ultimately
ending
up
implementing
it
anyway?
So
at
that
point
it's
like
well
new,
create
all
this
legacy
API
then
you
could
have
avoided,
but
just
implementing
what
they
have
right
and
I.
C
G
Words
but
yeah.
The
concern
like
I
had
called
is
a
minor
e,
the
other
lead
in
the
class
or
we
lose
the
Union
concerned
with
us
having
this
enum
in
our
custom,
which
now
in
the
future,
you
first
them
class
or
exhibition,
be
a
copy.
A
star
is
that
now
the
class
will
also
expose
the
its
own
enums.
Why
ever
once
think,
it'll.