[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-talk] Tor and P2P (Hidden SMS)
2012/9/26 meh. <meh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> It's not pragmatist at all, it wastes time and resources doing
> replaces when it could have just been really binary and prepend the
> length of the packet, which is the sane way to do something like that
> instead of using an end of packet separator.
No, these few string replaces do not waste any time or resources, this
claim is totally ridiculous.
> Also protocol buffers would have been a better choice for something
> like that, it would have beeen even smaller than your protocol and
> easier to implement, it would have made the protocol self-documenting
The protocol is self documenting, just print the messages to the
console as they are, the commands mean what their names suggest, it is
so simple you can even simulate a complete handshake and chat session
in telnet manually. Not every hype of the day (xml, protobuf,
binary-json, etc) must be used only because it exists and someone
thinks it has a cool sounding name, sometimes a simple line of text is
enough to transmit a simple foo=bar key-value pair without needing to
wrap it into kilobytes of obfuscating bloat.
tor-talk mailing list