On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 07:28:39AM +0200, Markus Wanner wrote:
> On 04/06/2016 05:26 AM, J Decker wrote:
> > If the structures might mutate with time something like json is pretty
> > brief.
> > if you have high reliability, sqlite for instance will store a blob
> > with only \0 for the 0 and \\ for \ ...
>
> JSON doesn't handle binary welll, it's a text format. Usually, base64 is
> used for binary data inside JSON - which is neither human readable nor
> space efficient.
>
> > which results in a copy or shift of data but only a simple comparison
> > if '\\' kinda like base 254 sorta :)
> > depending on what character happens least you could replace for
> > or something ...
>
> That's nonsense, according to http://stackoverflow.com/a/1443240, the
> JSON spec supports only 94 Unicode characters that can be represented as
> one byte (in UTF-8).
>
> Nor is there any canonical *and* human readable variant.
>
> If human readable, I'd currently prefer to try something canonical
> that's still valid YAML.
And if you want it to be human-readable you'd also want to avoid
visually confusing characters. No using both 0 and O. Or using 1, l,
and I. Even , and . can be hard to distinguish in soe fonts.
-- hendrik
___
Monotone-devel mailing list
Monotone-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
