jdev - 2023-11-03

Is there a web tool for checking JID validity against available prep levels?

> No framing is indeed a plus Not for the client. You need to write a stream read parser which makes impl way harder

just use any SAX parser?

that's a solved problem since 2000 or so

>> No framing is indeed a plus > Not for the client. You need to write a stream read parser which makes impl way harder You already have one for TCP that'll just work? ↺

I agree SAX parsers are the worst and XMPP should have framing itself, but in this context I meant it was more of a drop in replacement for TCP/TLS/QUIC because of no framing

what's wrong with SAX parsers?

(conceptually; I think we can all agree that the java-inspired SAX-interface' API is not great™.)

Upi

eek.

You've not seen true horror until you tried to do anything SOAP with Java...

s/ with Java// really

now that you said Java and SOAP in a single sentence, there is absolutely no way I cannot link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zn6cV6JuCMY

I'd not know - I never had to deal with SOAP outside of Java. Presumably the .NET side of things offers support? They always confuse me by trying to remove any reference to standard documents, and roll their own instead...

Hehe, yeah, that's a classic

Haha how had I not seen that

jonas’: 😂 thanks for sharing

> what's wrong with SAX parsers? They are tricky and have been the source of countless security bugs that could have been entirely avoided with framing ↺

framing has its own issues if it's not handled by the surroudning protocol already (think length field overflows)