Re: CBOR (Was: My experiences with Rust)

On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 05:09:46 +0300
Sulev-Madis Silber <freebsd-hackers-freebsd-org952@ketas.si.pri.ee> wrote:

> when i finger the old sw and hw, same patterns appear. things could use
> binary. things could be secured with deprecated methods. both will lead to
> loss of access. your conversion program could get lost. what if in future,
> my current favorite, json is also outdated and in same position of xml. but
> those things you could at least read and parse with your own eyes. sure, at
> some point the efficiency will maybe lead to binary formats but this is at
> loss of use in future. i bet if we still have people messing with data in
> future, i can already hear them yelling who was that asshole that created
> all this. since it's usage loss, it's even easy to forget it was for some
> greater good. even compression algorithms fail. ever had that feeling, phew,
> at least this thing uses *TEXT*. i can read it with standard tools? even if
> the output sucks balls. at least it's understandable. unsure if this
> justifies text only outputs but be prepared that somebody either discards or
> just curses a lot on your binary formats as much as you and i do now. the
> problem is in extra tools you need to invent to read all. yeah one could
> argue that maybe even ascii text is special binary format, we just still
> have tools to "get" it. but that thing has at least lasted for so long.
> along with c programming language and so on. why did they last? nothing
> really bad lasts. so maybe it was good? maybe people found it
> understandable? i have no idea how future will be. but some of those things
> are older than me and i can still understand them. why? it's all plain
> text!!! that one we view as bad and inefficient and what not. it all doesn't
> matter if you can't parse it

Your wall of something looking like ASCII text is completely unreadable. Could
you rewrite it into something more understandable / structured?

-- 
WBR, @nuclight