written by Robert Brotherus, March 16, 2009
So here's another attempt at a more condensed xml-version of the battle-data:
<Battle width="500" height="500" >
<Tank Type="Sherman" Count="6" Tactics="Tactics1">
I assume this is what you were looking for?
I agree, it's rather nicer than that expanded format I used. So how does it compare to the configuration file I used?
I'm not all that impressed by the XML, though it's better than it was. What do you think? Which would you rather edit?
The second question was about XML as a possible serialization format. To this Stephen informs us:Very good reasons for XML
written by Stephen Constable, March 17, 2009
and more but I can't be arsed.
So... what do I want these things for? Perhaps I'm missing something.
In other words, I'm concerned about serializing and de-serializing objects. Right now I get all of that for free with RMI. It sounds like you're telling me I should have to do a lot of complicated work instead. Using RMI, I *never* look at the serialization format. I don't want to. You'll telling me that I should? Do I get anything at all for all that extra effort?
Or is there something else that you guys are aiming at that I'm missing?
Is there something other than serialization that we're talking about?
* RMI is mainly a remote object technology, but it needs to serialize objects, and that serialization occurs for me with zero work on my part. I like that.