Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.213.175 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.213.175; envelope-from=jordanmack1981@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-yx0-f175.google.com; 
Sender: Jordan Mack <jordanmack1981@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EEF8806.6070707@parhelic.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:52:54 -0800
From: Jordan Mack <jordanmack@parhelic.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
	rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
References: <1323728469.78044.YahooMailNeo@web121012.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
	<201112191130.43721.luke@dashjr.org>
	<4EEF6EA2.4060709@parhelic.com>
	<201112191315.25857.luke@dashjr.org>
In-Reply-To: <201112191315.25857.luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [BIP 15] Aliases
Precedence: list

I believe I'm missing something here. I was under the interpretation 
that alias resolution was going the KISS route, of basically a single 
HTTP request and response. How do you see binary data fitting into this?

I'm not going to pretend that I know all the details of the difficulties 
that were encountered with JSON-RPC. But in the argument of developer 
accessibility, it still serves a purpose. If JSON-RPC support is 
removed, you will immediately lose a large pool of high level language 
developers. I would hope that support would not be dropped, even if it 
only remains as a secondary protocol with limited capability. Most high 
level developers are only going to use it for basic functions anyhow.


On 12/19/2011 10:15 AM, Luke-Jr wrote:
> Because computers work with binary. I don't think anyone wants to implement a
> fully functional script assembler just to send funds.
>
> JSON-RPC won't go on forever. In any case, bitcoind's use of JSON-RPC is
> exactly why I (and many other developers) have come to the realization how
> poorly supported JSON really is. Most of the common languages do have a
> library, but almost all of them have one issue or another (particularly around
> the very undefined Number type).