[erlang-questions] Binary string literal syntax

Sean Hinde sean.hinde@REDACTED
Thu Jun 7 11:57:26 CEST 2018

>>> Sure, most people have no clue how to program sockets these days so they use HTTP for everything -- but that isn't *most* protocols, that's a relatively small set of overwhelmingly *prolific* protocols. My prediction is that binary protocols will become more prolific as the extremely limited shared resource of wireless bandwidth becomes more and more saturated (and I don't think compression is a fix-all here, though it certainly helps).
>> I don’t think it really matters how we count. Text based protocols are here and Erlang ought to provide a great programming environment for them too.
> But they're on the way out. You won't find many new text-based protocols, and for good reasons. Even HTTP/2 went binary (and QUIC/HTTP will do the same).
> Plain-text is still king for content, but the trend has been toward binaries in recent years. Look at the number of binary serialization formats that popped up. Of course, it will be harder to take over JSON.

Even as an old school telecom protocols guy I’m not sure I really like this move for web based protocols. It’s nice to be able to read a protocol as text - however good one gets at reading hex dumps. HTTP Headers are a minuscule percentage of internet traffic which is dominated by video.

In any case these things tend to have pendulum like properties :)


> Cheers,
> -- 
> Loïc Hoguin
> https://ninenines.eu

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list