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

Re: [json] Re: Universal Binary JSON Specification

Expand Messages
  • Stephan Beal
    ... Don s point is valid but it assumes that every environment has this support, and that s not the case. Maybe his use cases/environments have that. When
    Message 1 of 76 , Sep 22, 2011
      On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 4:50 AM, rkalla123 <rkalla@...> wrote:

      > **
      >
      > bigdouble - marker 'W'
      > [W][222][222 big-endian ordered bytes representing a BigDecimal]
      >
      > Thoughts?
      >
      Don's point is valid but it assumes that every environment has this support,
      and that's not the case. Maybe his use cases/environments have that. When
      writing generic code, however, "big numbers" don't exist.

      --
      ----- stephan beal
      http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • 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
        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.