On 06/12/2011 12:44, Seref Arikan wrote:
> A bunch of responses, most of which should actually go to a wiki page
> for Bosphorus
>
> I've used binary serialization for AOM because although Eiffel is a
> very impressive language, I am not happy about its libraries. Some of
> them are mature, but for XML, I could not find anything that'd be
> guaranteed to be maintained.
I don't think there is any problem with them being maintained, they are
part of the main Eiffel tool. The choice of Protocl buffers (or maybe
there is another better variant?) makes sense on the basis of
performance....
> Protocol buffers is a technology that is used very heavily in Google,
> and has a large community.
> Performance is the key aspect of protocol buffers. It is very, very
> fast. When I'm exchanging simple messages over ZeroMQ (a very fast
> queue framework that is used in Bosphorus) I can achieve microsecond
> level performance (not even millisecond!) for Java to Eiffel
> communication. For desktop tooling purposes, this is much faster than
> XML.
orders of magnitude...
>
>
> Thomas is heroically responding to all queries without judgement, and
> he is even implementing a lot of code, to give grounded answers, to
> provide proofs.
don't give me too much credit: my lightweight serialisation library
allowed me to implement JSON output in about 4 hours, plus two days
background debugging of the {[]} ....
> I guess I am not as mature and as dedicated as he is. I'd rather have
> him working on adl 1.5 XSD schemas than proving people that openEHR
> can do JSON if necessary. Because having XSDs for ADL 1.5 is going to
> increase adoption of openEHR a lot more than having JSON output. If
> anybody out there does not agree, please come forward and talk about
> your JSON usage in your project which is about an actual information
> system that is running, or is supposed to run in a clinical setting.
yes, I think it is about time we posted a proposed AOM 1.5 XSD...
- thomas
