randersson

5 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by randersson 14y ago

   the license is essentially a statement that the Blink specification is and will be entirely free to use. There has been a lot of discussion re lock-in and we wanted to be clear about our intentions. Implementors are obviously free to choose
2. 2.▲
   by randersson 14y ago

   ease of use. It is a much nicer syntax to use when authoring message specs. There are equivalent XML and JSON syntax variants for Blink schemas for those who'd prefer that. Rolf
3. 3.▲
   by randersson 14y ago

   We discussed length preambles vs markers when we designed the FAST protocol 8 years ago. That time we made length preambles optional (there are two "modes"). The nature of the FAST encoding made it impractical to use markers even though it
4. 4.▲
   by randersson 14y ago

   I was maybe a little terse in my blog post. I agree that you can certainly do this, but it seems G decided that it was not worth adding as a core feature. At least that is my understanding from reading their docs. Blink on the other hand re
5. 5.▲
   by randersson 14y ago

   agreed, a test suite will be essential for implementors. I'd be very interested to hear you thoughts on this. Please mail me if you have interest. Rolf
6. 6.▲
   by randersson 14y ago

   good question; I usually declare fields optional for the reason described in the reply above. I just re-ran the test with all fields declared as "required". It ran ~2% faster.