Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: JSON.hpack - JavaScript, PHP, C# (Python Soon)

Expand Messages
  • an_red@ymail.com
    Is something like this enough? http://wiki.github.com/WebReflection/json.hpack/specs-details Best Regards. Andrea Giammarchi
    Message 1 of 8 , May 29, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Is something like this enough?
      http://wiki.github.com/WebReflection/json.hpack/specs-details

      Best Regards.

      Andrea Giammarchi

      --- In json@yahoogroups.com, Tatu Saloranta <tsaloranta@...> wrote:
      >
      > On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 1:25 AM, an_red@...
      > <andrea.giammarchi@...> wrote:
      > > Tatu, gzip works faster in any case over JSON.hpack(ed) stuff for the same reason JSON.stringify / parse is faster over JSON.hpacked stuff, less characters to work over (you gzip a string smaller up to 80%)
      >
      > Yes, certainly, not arguing with that, wrt. speed.
      >
      > > It could be a separated layer in any case, but even over, will be faster. The C# implementation of both hpack and hunpack are extremely fast, I need time to create a Python version and I was planning to create a PHP
      >
      > No doubt, it should be a fairly simple transformation on other
      > languages as well.
      >
      > > extension in C as well but only one Java guy told me he will try to create a parser ... I mean, C# version is not that different, I guess a porting will take a
      >
      > There are many good fast Java parsers, so I would recommend using one
      > of those, and add transformation layer on top. No need to write a
      > parser (IMO -- but I have written mine so I may be biased).
      >
      > > Anyway, I miss your point about specify the convention ... do you mean
      > > proper specs? I could write something more than I already wrote on github homepage, let me know.
      >
      > Yeah, specification of this convention (or transformation),
      > documenting how it should behave. This is necessary (or at least
      > useful) to ensure interoperability. Given how many people want to
      > write their own json parsers (... just a random example...), because
      > they don't like what is available, I'm sure there'll be many who'd
      > want to reimplement this mapping as well.
      > But at least implementations would be interoperable.
      >
      > So yes, need not be anything too heavy-weight, but somewhat formal
      > notation helps in my opinion.
      >
      > Thanks!
      >
      > -+ Tatu +-
      >
    • Tatu Saloranta
      On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 3:29 AM, an_red@ymail.com ... I think so (didn t read in detail) -- and if there are questions, it s easy to contact you and suggest
      Message 2 of 8 , May 29, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 3:29 AM, an_red@...
        <andrea.giammarchi@...> wrote:
        > Is something like this enough?
        > http://wiki.github.com/WebReflection/json.hpack/specs-details

        I think so (didn't read in detail) -- and if there are questions, it's
        easy to contact you and suggest clarifications.

        Thanks!

        -+ Tatu +-
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.