[erlang-questions] UBF(A) vs ETF / UBF(C) vs gen_fsm

Scott Lystig Fritchie <>
Wed Sep 22 22:43:36 CEST 2010


Edmond Begumisa <> wrote:

>> Having parsed the JSON (or UBF(A) ) the parse trees would be
>> essentially the same thing so the contract checker would be easy.

eb> Ditto! It's actually that blog entry that got me to look at UBF
eb> (what ever happened to part II of that BTW!?!) I've been
eb> contemplating using Gemini's UBF-JSON to make life easier on the
eb> XULRunner side. I don't know if you've had a look at/recommend their
eb> implementation...

eb> http://github.com/norton/ubf-jsonrpc

Yes, that's what the ubf-jsonrpc package does.  There's also the option
of using the http://github.com/norton/ubf stuff as-is to implement a
"JSF" server, which is straight JSON across a TCP socket (i.e., without
any JSON-RPC HTTP stuff).

IIRC, it's just a server-side configuration option {proto, ubf} or
{proto, jsf} or {proto, ebf} to have an Erlang server speak UBF(A),
"JSF", or UBF-terms-encoded-with-term_to_binary(), respectively.

-Scott


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list