From: | "Massa, Harald Armin" <chef(at)ghum(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: generic options for explain |
Date: | 2009-05-25 15:15:25 |
Message-ID: | e3e180dc0905250815h2f1f4a6y4846d8902143028c@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> The impression I have is that (to misquote Churchill) XML is the worst
> option available, except for all the others. We need something that can
> represent a fairly complex data structure, easily supports addition or
> removal of particular fields in the structure (including fields not
> foreseen in the original design), is not hard for programs to parse,
> and is widely supported --- ie, "not hard" includes "you don't have to
> write your own parser, in most languages". How many realistic
> alternatives are there?
>
> One realistic alternative may be JSON: parsers for nearly all languages are
freely available; everything web-affected speeks it perfectly; it's easier
on the eye then XML, less bytes per information, addition and removal of
fields as well as complex structures are possible.
Harald
--
GHUM Harald Massa
persuadere et programmare
Harald Armin Massa
Spielberger Straße 49
70435 Stuttgart
0173/9409607
no fx, no carrier pigeon
-
LASIK good, steroids bad?
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Meskes | 2009-05-25 15:21:54 | Re: Warnings in compile |
Previous Message | Joshua Tolley | 2009-05-25 15:13:57 | Re: generic options for explain |