3 ms·
That's useful for RPC type protocols, but HTTP isn't RPC based and it has lots of semantics written in English. I think it's better that way because it allows f
by brokenparser 13y ago
That's useful for RPC type protocols, but HTTP isn't RPC based and it has lots of semantics written in English. I think it's better that way because it allows for a greater variety of use cases and implementations. You can still do RPC with websockets, if that's what you want.
- bitwize 13y agoI've seen this done with the on-the-wire protocol of scientific measuring equipment. It's hardly just for RPC (which HTTP increasingly resembles anyway). The point is, the ability to "type" a protocol is irrelevant to how modern distributed software gets developed. Maybe it mattered in the days when comms were at 300 baud, machines had kilobytes or perhaps megabytes of core, and the Mark I eyeball was the best way to debug machine-to-machine comms, but these days we have tools that can decipher binary wire protocols for us. Performance and adaptability are far more important now than human readability. That war has been lost.