-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 61
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feature: support diagnostic notation #384
Comments
@zensh yes, I think supporting Diagnostic Notation (DN) would be useful, but we should avoid affecting performance of regular CBOR decoding/unmarshalling ( Please feel free to open PR and maybe include comparison output from BTW, in case you're interested, Appendix G of RFC 8610 defines the Extended Diagnostic Notation, which adds some extensions to DN. |
Signed-off-by: Yan Qing <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Yan Qing <[email protected]>
@fxamacker Do you have any other suggestions? I can fix them. |
@zensh The PR is looking good, I reviewed text string encoding today and need to continue reviewing the rest next weekend. I was asked to take over a project at work and have been working more overtime than usual. And my father passed away this year so my personal time was affected. The kindness of contributors on this project have been a welcome oasis. Thanks again for your patience and contributions! |
Signed-off-by: Yan Qing <[email protected]>
Implements diagnostic notation (#384)
This is closed by PR #386. Great work! 🎉 |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8949.html#name-diagnostic-notation
I would like to make a PR.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: