<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7652.24">
<TITLE>Re: Cross-client memcached compatibility</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>That sounds like a plan then. How many flags values are "free"? Maybe we could identify one specifically for some specific kind of cross platform serialization method (again I'm thinking json although not necessarily that).<BR>
<BR>
My thinking is to make it easier for the clients to put together something truly cross platform out of the box so to speak and not to rely on the user of the library to setup the correct hooks. Unless I minsunderstood what you said :)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-----------------------------------<BR>
This message was sent by Blackberry<BR>
<BR>
----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: Aaron Stone <aaron@serendipity.cx><BR>
To: Kieran Benton<BR>
Cc: memcached@lists.danga.com <memcached@lists.danga.com><BR>
Sent: Wed Jan 30 08:25:42 2008<BR>
Subject: Re: Cross-client memcached compatibility<BR>
<BR>
I think it would make sense to flag for serialization method -- rather<BR>
than trying to pick or define a single serialization method for all<BR>
clients, the clients simply flag with the method they used.<BR>
<BR>
Most languages have libraries available to interpret most other<BR>
languages' native serialization, so I think we can leverage that via<BR>
callbacks and flexible data type flags.<BR>
<BR>
Aaron<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 07:50 +0000, Kieran Benton wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> How about standardising on something like json? Either that or we're<BR>
> basically going to have to put a custom serialization rules together<BR>
> each client has to follow?<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> -----------------------------------<BR>
> This message was sent by Blackberry<BR>
><BR>
> ----- Original Message -----<BR>
> From: memcached-bounces@lists.danga.com<BR>
> <memcached-bounces@lists.danga.com><BR>
> To: dormando <dormando@rydia.net><BR>
> Cc: memcached@lists.danga.com <memcached@lists.danga.com><BR>
> Sent: Wed Jan 30 06:08:47 2008<BR>
> Subject: Re: Cross-client memcached compatibility<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> On Jan 29, 2008, at 21:40, dormando wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> > Wonder if we can just put up a list of flag recommendations (and<BR>
> > storage mediums?) and see if it catches on? Or perhaps pisses<BR>
> > someone off enough to provoke discussion?<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Makes sense to me.<BR>
><BR>
> The most controversial part would be lists and dictionaries<BR>
> since<BR>
> they nest types.<BR>
><BR>
> --<BR>
> Dustin Sallings<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>