From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MqOb5-0007U6-KZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Sep 2009 05:57:15 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MqOay-0007Jz-Pw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Sep 2009 05:57:13 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34955 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MqOay-0007Iy-2k for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Sep 2009 05:57:08 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:23157) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MqOax-0004t3-8Y for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Sep 2009 05:57:07 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:57:01 +0100 From: "Daniel P. Berrange" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] ANN: QEMU Monitor Protocol git tree Message-ID: <20090923095701.GE29269@redhat.com> References: <20090921224430.610da97b@doriath> <4AB98034.3060608@codemonkey.ws> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AB98034.3060608@codemonkey.ws> Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: avi@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Luiz Capitulino On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 08:56:04PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: > Luiz Capitulino wrote: > >Now the controversial part: it's json based. ;) > > > >I have chosen json because of the reasons already explained by others in > >the original QMP thread. Basically, json is so simple that if we design > >a small protocol from scratch, chances are it will look like json. > > > > json is not a deal break. My main concern was our ability to extend > json and whether supporting stock json libraries was a hard > requirement. I also would like to see a C client library since our > biggest consumer (libvirt) is based in C. I've googled around quickly and there are at least 5 pieces of C code and/or C libraries that can parse JSON. Hopefully one of them will be sufficient / suitable for libvirt's needs. We'll just need to try it out and see what happens.... > >2.1 General Definitions > >----------------------- > > > >All interactions transmitted by Client and Server are json-objects that end > >with CRLF. > > > > CRLF? Really? > > Ignoring the dos-ism, since you can parse JSON with a regexp, why do we > need explicit message boundaries? I think it would be nice to be able to assume that each JSON message will not cross a line-end boundary. Whether we use CRLF, just CR or just LF I don't mind. Its much easier to search for a message boundary by just doing strchr('\n') than having to actually parse the JSON or use a regexp at that point. Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|