2 ms·
Indeed--this is what was meant by "indices". It's kind of like XML. It was never meant to be seen by human eyes, except in a few debugging scenarios. Unfortu
by downerending 7y ago
Indeed--this is what was meant by "indices".
It's kind of like XML. It was never meant to be seen by human eyes, except in a few debugging scenarios. Unfortunately, that intention was ignored, and now we have a usability disaster. (At least in the case of XML, it can just die.)
- lokedhs 7y agoI agree with what you said about XML. But in its stead we have a lot of JSON which is several respects is even worse. The worst part of it is that it doesn't have a stable definition for numbers, making it impossible to guarantee you're getting the same value back if you encode and then decode a number. Reliably preserving the data you serialise using it should be a primary feature for an encoding format. JSON can't even do that.
- gowld 7y agoWhy do you need a stable serialization for an unstable data type? Use a string of you want stability.
- lokedhs 7y agoThe point is that a 64-bit integer is stable in the language I'm using (which is most languages). My opinion is that a serialisation format that explicitly makes something as fundamental as the representation of numbers unspecified is not useful as a data representation format.