|
|
|
|
|
by andrewstuart2
2 hours ago
|
|
I would call it clever. I'm not sure I'd call it genius. When I'm working with data I'm working in a specific set of languages. Usually one. Yeah, other people might be working in other languages, but no individual author really needs a language-agnostic way of accessing data beyond compile time. Add to that the likely runtime boundaries that may need to be crossed instead of e.g. inlined by the compiler because it's in-language and dealing with known offsets or tags (depends on the data format of course). To the other commenter's point, am I going to have to sandbox all data access code just to be sure it's not able to do something unexpected? There's a lot of complexity here. And the inherent risk is going to slow down the operation that should be the simplest and fastest: interpreting bytes. |
|
So this is really about making a file that is forwards compatible in a way that lets you push the standards more than existing formats.