Re: [json] Universal Binary JSON Specification
- On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 6:45 PM, Tatu Saloranta <tsaloranta@...>wrote:
> **Thank you for that. Smile's requirement that impls be capable of supporting
> You might be interested in an existing such specification called
> Smile: http://wiki.fasterxml.com/SmileFormatSpec
> which was specified about a year ago, has Java and C implementations,
> and used by a few projects/products like ElasticSearch.
"shared strings" seems a bit draconian to me, though. That adds non-trivial
parser/writer infrastructure which would otherwise not be required
(especially in C, which doesn't have standard containers we can use to store
such strings/references in).
----- stephan beal
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 9:42 AM, rkalla123 <rkalla@...> wrote:
> Stephan,For what it is worth, I also consider support for only signed values a
> 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.
-+ Tatu +-