Better Than JSON?
wiki.alopex.li
Better Than JSON?
1–10 of 153 posts
Re: Better Than JSON?
#2S-expressions are the most logical representation of data structures. “CAR”/“CDR” are not a part of the expression syntax, so this argument against them won’t matter.
Re: Better Than JSON?
#3Edn should be on this list
Re: Better Than JSON?
#4There is no such thing and this is blasphemous - shut it down.
Re: Better Than JSON?
#5When is XML never not too verbose?
(jk)
Very interesting article and I like the style in which it was written.
Another factor to consider is whether the serialisation code is intrusive or not. Being intrusive can be an issue for legacy codebases, and IMO is not paricularly welcome regardless.
Re: Better Than JSON?
#6Everyone loves to hate on XML just because it can be verbose and some of the WS* protocols are complicated. But as a human-readable format it’s no harder to read or parse than JSON and legacy application support is orders of magnitude better than JSON. I’m not saying we should all use it but we shouldn’t be hating it either.
Re: Better Than JSON?
#7Anything that lists BSON should include the fix: JSONB
Re: Better Than JSON?
#8Wish the author would have checked out: https://borsh.io/
I've been using it lately but i'm i'll qualified to review it to any meaningful degree. It's neat, (reportedly) fast, but has seeming zero traction and thus makes me uneasy.
(I'm currently (configurably) using it in place of bincode, for a content addressed store. for some context)
Re: Better Than JSON?
#9There is no such thing and this is blasphemous - shut it down.
It would be nice to be able to represent 64-bit ints--and have comments.
Re: Better Than JSON?
#10The list shouldn't mix those with a schema and those without.
Anything using a schema that is agreed upon between participants isn't like JSON at all.