Re: [apps-discuss] Gen-ART review of draft-bormann-cbor-04

[Phillip Hallam-Baker <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Aug 13, 2013, at 13:14, Tony Finch <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > MessagePack is simpler so will need even less code
>
> FWIW, earlier today I had a nice afternoon with the msgpack-ruby C code,
> converting it to encoding and decoding CBOR instead.
>
> Saved ~ 250 lines of C code.
>
> Of course, I'm filling in that gap now by implementing some of the
> optional tags of CBOR.
> In the end, the implementation of a generic CBOR encoder/decoder with a
> sizable collection of optional tags will probably indeed be slightly larger.
> But if you just need the features of MessagePack, I now have one data
> point where CBOR measurably wins on the implementation complexity metric.
>
> Grüße, Carsten
>
>
How does it compare to JSON-B which is considerably simpler than CBOR?

Getting Proposed Standard this way is not going to count for anything
because your proposal that you named after yourself was never in
competition with anything else. No other competitors were allowed.


And, no, no apologies for complaining about this farce.

-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/