> All data that's ever sent to or received from the server would be in JSON format. JSON is much more human-readable than XML.
I don't need my protocols to be human readable. I need my computers to read them and know that I've got good, bug-free, reusable, efficient, and easy-to understand implementations.
This isn't an argument for XML over JSON -- I've made good use of both, but I don't want to consider how easy it is to type up communication protocols when I'm defining stuff the replacement for something I expect to take over the world.
It's by far easier to implement the memcached binary protocol as a client or a server than it is to implement the text protocol. Easier to get right, more regular, and just generally more pleasant.
Comments
> All data that's ever sent to or received from the server would be in JSON format. JSON is much more human-readable than XML.
I don't need my protocols to be human readable. I need my computers to read them and know that I've got good, bug-free, reusable, efficient, and easy-to understand implementations.
This isn't an argument for XML over JSON -- I've made good use of both, but I don't want to consider how easy it is to type up communication protocols when I'm defining stuff the replacement for something I expect to take over the world.
It's by far easier to implement the memcached binary protocol as a client or a server than it is to implement the text protocol. Easier to get right, more regular, and just generally more pleasant.
As far as I'm concerned, the argument for JSON over XML is that the parser should be much lighter. No bloody entities to worry about, for a start.