Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #11870
| From | BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication |
| Date | 2012-02-08 23:29 -0700 |
| Organization | albasani.net |
| Message-ID | <jgvp6o$79l$1@news.albasani.net> (permalink) |
| References | (4 earlier) <jgtcid$kfs$1@news.albasani.net> <26124274.18.1328738542263.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbks5> <jgv8og$6ac$1@news.albasani.net> <4f332c0a$0$288$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <2745507.3.1328760474286.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbcpo5> |
On 2/8/2012 9:07 PM, Lew wrote: > On Wednesday, February 8, 2012 6:14:31 PM UTC-8, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> On 2/8/2012 8:49 PM, BGB wrote: >>> as noted, many people neither use schemas nor any sort of schema >>> validation. in many use-cases, schemas are overly constraining to the >>> ability of using XML to represent free-form data, or using them >>> otherwise would offer little particular advantage. >> >> xsd:any do provide some flexibility in schemas. >> >>> say, if one is using XML for compiler ASTs or similar (say, the XML is >>> used to represent a just-parsed glob of source-code), do they really >>> need any sort of schema? >> >> I would expect syntax trees to follow certain rules and not be free >> form. > > In one breath we're singing the praises of binary formats, in the next we > complain that XML isn't sufficiently flexible. > it is not like one can't have both: have a format which is at the same time is a compressed binary format, and can also retain the full flexibility of representing free-form XML semantics, ideally without a major drop in compactness (this happens with WBXML, and IIRC should also happen with EXI about as soon as one starts encoding nodes which lie outside the schema). this is partly why I was advocating a sort of pattern-building adaptive format: it can build the functional analogue of a schema as it encodes the data, and likewise does not depend on a schema to properly decode the document. it is mostly a matter of having the format predict when it doesn't need to specify tag and attribute names (it is otherwise similar to a traditional data-compressor). this is functionally similar to the sliding-window as used in deflate and LZMA (7zip) and similar (in contrast to codebook-based data compressors). functionally, it would have a little more in common with LZW+MTF than with LZ77 though. granted, potentially a binary format could incorporate both support for schemas and the use of adaptive compression. is XML really the text, or is it actually the structure? I had operated under the premise that it was the data-structure (tags, attributes, namespaces, ...), which allows for pretty much anything which can faithfully encode the structure (without imposing too many arbitrary restrictions). > "Do they really need any sort of schema?" with XML is usually a "yes". > > But only if you're interested in clear, unambiguous, readily-parsable and > maintainable XML document formats. > fair enough, I have mostly been using it "internally", and as noted, for some of my file-formats, I had used a custom binary coded variant (roughly similar to WBXML, but generally more compact and supporting more features, such as namespaces and similar, which I had called SBXE). it didn't make use of schemas, and worked by simply encoding the tag structure into the file, and using basic contextual modeling strategies. it also compared favorably with XML+GZ in my tests (which IIRC was also generally smaller than WBXML). remotely possible would also be XML+BZip2 or XML+LZMA. I had considered the possibility of a more "advanced" format (with more advanced predictive modeling), but didn't bother (couldn't see much point at the time of trying to shave off more bytes at the time, as it was already working fairly well). > People often excoriate the supposed verbosity of XML as though it were the only > criterion to measure utility. > well, a lot depends... for disk files, really, who cares?... for a link where a several kB message might only take maybe 250-500ms and is at typical "user-interaction" speeds (say, part of a generic "web app"), likewise, who cares?... it may matter a little more in a 3D interactive world where everything going on in the visible scene has to get through at a 10Hz or 24Hz clock-tick, and if the connection bogs down the user will be rather annoyed (as their game world has essentially stalled). one may have to make due with about 16-24kB/s (or maybe less) to better ensure a good user experience (little is to say that the user has a perfect internet connection either). so, some sort of compression may be needed in this case. (yes, XML+GZ would probably be sufficient). if it were dial-up, probably no one would even consider using XML for the network protocol in a 3D game. > There is no inherent advantage of a LISP/list-like format over any other, nor vice versa; it's all accordin'. If the convention is agreeable to all parties, > it will work. If all projects were one-off and isolated from the larger world, > we'd never need to adhere to a standard. If we don't mind inventing our own > tools for anything, we'd never have to adopt a standard with extensive tools > support. > it is possible, it all depends. a swaying factor in my last choice was the effort tradeoff of writing the code (because working with DOM is kind of a pain...). IIRC, I may have also been worrying about performance (mostly passing around lots of numeric data as ASCII strings, ...). but, I may eventually need to throw together a basic encoding scheme for this case (a binary encoder for list-based data), that or just reuse an existing data serializer of mine (mostly intended for generic data serialization, which supports lists). it lacks any sort of prediction or context modeling though, and is used in my stuff mostly as a container format for bytecode for my VM and similar. > Where are the *real* costs of a software system? > who knows?... probably delivering the best reasonable user experience?... for a game: reasonably good graphics; reasonably good performance (ideally, consistently over 30fps); hopefully good gameplay, plot, story, ... well, that and "getting everything done" (this is the hard one).
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication jebblue <n@n.nnn> - 2012-02-07 12:11 -0600
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-07 16:38 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-02-07 20:26 -0400
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-08 01:41 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-02-08 07:19 -0400
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-08 12:07 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-08 21:16 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-08 19:50 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-02-09 06:24 -0400
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-09 09:15 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-02-09 18:58 -0400
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-09 16:15 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-09 18:50 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-09 21:40 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 14:47 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-11 12:06 -0800
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 15:18 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-11 23:03 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-12 09:27 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-12 13:33 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-12 15:50 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-12 14:34 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-09 18:48 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-09 21:46 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-10 08:51 -0800
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-10 10:43 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-10 13:15 -0800
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-10 14:50 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-10 14:32 -0800
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-10 17:10 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-02-10 22:08 -0400
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-11 00:49 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-02-11 14:04 -0400
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 14:55 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 14:52 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-11 20:06 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 22:41 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-12 00:46 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-12 09:29 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-12 09:31 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-02-12 16:02 +0000
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-12 11:16 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-02-12 22:46 +0000
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-12 11:33 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-11 20:18 -0800
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-12 01:36 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2012-02-12 13:52 -0600
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-12 14:43 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 14:49 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-09 18:46 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-09 18:45 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-08 14:02 -0800
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-08 18:49 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-08 21:14 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-08 20:07 -0800
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-08 23:29 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-09 09:40 -0800
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-09 17:02 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-08 21:10 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-09 18:54 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-10 10:25 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 14:45 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-11 12:14 -0800
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 15:20 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-11 22:20 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-12 09:23 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-12 12:13 -0700
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-07 20:24 -0500
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-02-08 01:31 +0000
Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-08 00:55 -0700
csiph-web