Re: RE: [Winer] Sun & SOAP: Yes or no?

From: Ka-Ping Yee (ping@lfw.org)
Date: Thu May 18 2000 - 23:09:03 PDT

• Next message: Anne Thomas Manes: "Re: [Winer] Sun & SOAP: Yes or no?"
• Previous message: Adam Rifkin -4K: "[Forbes] The Best VCs."
• In reply to: Kragen Sitaker: "Re: RE: [Winer] Sun & SOAP: Yes or no?"
• Next in thread: Anne Thomas Manes: "Re: [Winer] Sun & SOAP: Yes or no?"

On Thu, 18 May 2000, Kragen Sitaker wrote:
> > Binary protocols are smaller, faster, language-independant,
> > unpatentable, and free.
>
> "smaller": yes, the data is smaller. The implementation is much larger.

Wait, you're kidding, right?

read(handle, struct, sizeof(struct)) vs. a complete XML parser?

XML has some advantages, yes, but speed, small data, and small
code are not among them.

-- ?!ng

"Simple, yet complex."
    -- Lenore Snell

• Next message: Anne Thomas Manes: "Re: [Winer] Sun & SOAP: Yes or no?"
• Previous message: Adam Rifkin -4K: "[Forbes] The Best VCs."
• In reply to: Kragen Sitaker: "Re: RE: [Winer] Sun & SOAP: Yes or no?"
• Next in thread: Anne Thomas Manes: "Re: [Winer] Sun & SOAP: Yes or no?"

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 18 2000 - 23:33:49 PDT