Ambrosia wrote: > Speaking of saving bytes, it was mentioned on this list a longer time > ago, and for some reason rejected: > > The idea of using Google Protocol Buffers instead of the currently > rather unflexible implementation of LLSD. > > http://code.google.com/intl/de-DE/apis/protocolbuffers/ > > The protocol buffers serve pretty much the same purpose, are less > verbose, and support -optional- fields, > which means that in some cases quite alot of overhead could be saved. > Headers and cpp files for the > messages can be autoconstructed as well. Worth a look, IMO. >
There's been much discussion on the MMOX mailing list about LLSD vs google protocol buffers. I'm not sure that the rejection was concerning that particular form of serialization or merely concerns about insisting that we use that particular way of describing the on-the-wire protocol. Lawson mmox mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmox _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/SLDev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
