From: Vinnie Falco (vinnie.falco_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-09-16 15:08:29
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 8:02 AM Peter Dimov via Boost
> The point of "binary JSON" is that people already have a code base that uses
> JSON for communication and - let's suppose - boost::json::value internally.
> Now those people want to offer an optional, alternate wire format that is
> not as wasteful as JSON, so that the other endpoint may choose to use it.
So what is being discussed here is "partial CBOR support?" In other
words, only the subset of CBOR that perfectly overlaps with JSON?
> (There is actually a fully compatible way to support "binary values" in
> json::value, but it will require some hammering out.)
Well, let's hear it!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk