1814Re: [json] Re: Universal Binary JSON Specification
- Feb 20, 2012On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 6:12 PM, rkalla123 <rkalla@...> wrote:
> **Hi! Is it still this doc:
> Anyone else have any thoughts? Stephan, Don, Tatu, Milo?
that one hasn't been edited since September?
A couple comments, both positive:
> * no int64 length support, (REASON), not every platform plays nice with64-bit. ...
> decode the format contents correctly. (WORKAROUND) just breakA second workaround option is to use doubles for such cases.
> the data payload into an array of multiple STRING or HUGE's.
> * signed length values, (REASON), numeric types in UBJSONWhile i think it's an unfortunate limitation, i think it is the right thing
> are all signed.
to do for UBJSON. It used to bug the hell out of me that Google' v8 JS
engine doesn't support unsigned numbers, but i've since gotten over it and
just use doubles as a proxy when i _have_ to deal with large integers.
----- stephan beal
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>