RFC 7049 - Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)

Re:RFC 7049 - Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) by angersock on Tuesday October 29, 2013 @12:35PM (#6635470)

Name me a particular time where a file format has ever had increased robustness, speed, security, or implementation simplicity because it did not specify record size ahead of time.

Please convince me of the reliability of sentinel values and null-terminated strings.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:RFC 7049 - Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) by Arelius on Wednesday October 30, 2013 @02:36AM (#6639892)

Apologies, I didn't read the spec before hand. I thought you were suggesting that the format have fixed sized fields rather then fields with tagged lengths. In that case I'd agree with you.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:RFC 7049 - Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) by angersock on Wednesday October 30, 2013 @01:26PM (#6641747)

No sweat. :)

[ Parent | on HN ]