[TUHS] tangential unix question: whatever happened to NeWS?

John Cowan cowan at ccil.org
Sun Jan 31 09:20:53 AEST 2021

Those were just examples.  The hard part is parsing schemas, especially if
you're writing in C and don't know about yacc and lex.  That code tends to
be horribly buggy.

But unless you need to support PER (which outright requires the schema) or
unless you are trying to map ASN.1 compound objects to C structs or the
equivalent, you can just process the whole thing in the same way you would
JSON, except that it's binary and there are more types.  Easy-peasy,
especially in a dynamically typed language.

Once there was a person on the xml-dev mailing list who kept repeating
himself, insisting on the superiority of ASN.1 to XML.  Finally I told him
privately that his emails could be encoded in PER by using 0x01 to
represent him (as the value of the author field) and allowing the
recipients to reconstruct the message from that!  He took it in good part.

John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
Don't be so humble.  You're not that great.
        --Golda Meir

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 10:52 PM Richard Salz <rich.salz at gmail.com> wrote:

> PER is not the reason for the hatred of ASN.1, it's more that the specs
> were created by a pay-to-play organization that fought against TCP/IP, the
> specs were not freely available for long years, BER was too flexible, and
> the DER rules were almost too hard to get right.  Just a terse summary
> because this is probably off-topic for TUHS.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20210130/cfed99b6/attachment.htm>

More information about the TUHS mailing list