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

Re: Universal Binary JSON Specification

Expand Messages
  • rkalla123
    ... Do you happen to have a link? This is something I d like to know more about/play with a bit. Best, Riyad
    Message 1 of 76 , Sep 21, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In json@yahoogroups.com, Stephan Beal <sgbeal@...> wrote:
      > The "new" JS version (don't remember the version number) fills that gap. It
      > allows us to efficiently consume and produce binary data in JS. Trying to
      > use a JS Array to store binary data (e.g. as 1-4 bytes/element) has a HUGE
      > overhead because of the internal impl details of the Array class, which is
      > normally a linked list).

      Do you happen to have a link? This is something I'd like to know more about/play with a bit.

      Best,
      Riyad
    • Tatu Saloranta
      ... For what it is worth, I also consider support for only signed values a good thing. -+ Tatu +-
      Message 76 of 76 , Feb 20, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 9:42 AM, rkalla123 <rkalla@...> wrote:
        > Stephan,
        >
        > No problem; your feedback are still very applicable and much appreciated.
        >
        > The additional view-point on the signed/unsigned issue was exactly what I was hoping for. My primary goal has always been simplicity and I know at least from the Java world, going with unsigned values would have made the impl distinctly *not* simple (and an annoying API).
        >
        > So I am glad to get some validation there that I am not alienating every other language at the cost of Java.

        For what it is worth, I also consider support for only signed values a
        good thing.

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