On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 3:21 AM, Kalki70 <kalki...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Maybe the ASN.1 compiler that you used used too many memory
> allocations or was not too fast. There are some very good, like from
> OSS Novalka.

I've used both OSS Nokalva's ASN.1 to Java compiler and protobuf in
anger. protobuf is at least as fast, provides a better API (especially
if you want to do any reflection), and is less buggy than OSS's
product. Being able to build protobuf from source makes our build
process a lot simpler, too.

We actually use both in our system - OSS when we must talk ASN.1 in
external protocols, and protobuf for our internal protocols where we
are not implementing to an external specification.

I think that protobuf's simplicity is a large part of why its
implementation is better than the various ASN.1 products out there.
ASN.1 seems to be the Ada of protocol description languages, really..


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to