Your methods are that of scammers.
Could you be more specific?
Topic: IOTA - page 710. (Read 1473405 times)
IOTA has been accepted into Wanxiang's Blockchain Lab grant programme: http://www.blockchainlabs.org/blockgrant-x-en/
Cong.IOTA got 4000 USD award.
I note Wanxiang make no mantion of the "Quantum Secure" property/design/goal of IOTA.
Did they examine/consider it in their analysis? Thanks
I mentioned it in the grant form, so they are certainly aware of it.
@Hueristic, deleted your post for ad hominem.
That was not Ad-Hominem, it was an observation. Doesn't matter. I have no faith in you people. Your methods are that of scammers. And that is another observation not an attack.
EDITED OUT
Now this is Ad-Hominem!
I have not held XMR for over a year now. I still feel it's the best alt atm. I do watch promising new tech which I am hoping this will actually be. I guess I should remove the XMR address so idiots don't auto think I'm affiliated.
@Hueristic, deleted your post for ad hominem.
That was not Ad-Hominem, it was an observation. Doesn't matter. I have no faith in you people. Your methods are that of scammers. And that is another observation not an attack.
anyone of you iota people gonna be at the CCC Conference in Hamburg?
this has to be be specification move....
In short, you may need to roll your own toJSONString() method (or methods) for your base-type(s) and then convert your Map to a Map and then just call any standard toJSON(...) call for Maps.
It's a standard way of doing such tasks but if I add all this syntactic sugar it will occupy 30% of all code LOL.
You can move this additional code to external library.
Well, I admit that I'm projecting onto Java what I know about languages that compile down to low-level, IL binaries, which I mostly understand through .Net/C#.
I think the biggest problem for this type of implementation is that when serializing an object, frameworks such as .Net (or in this case Java) need to assure that once an object is serialized (either to JSON, XML or even to a binary-state) their must be assurance that any restoration from the serialized value, to a java object MUST restore the full state of the object.
Consider the following example to illustrate the problem.
We would hope/suspect that json would equal something like "{c:3}". There is nothing wrong with this but we have one big problem! Now we need to take our json value and create a new MyClass object. How do we do that?
We can't because we need to know the state of 'a' and 'b', in order to deserialize the JSON object and create a Java, MyClass object.
When you inherit from a serializer class (MyClass : SerialiableObject) the base serializer will either not care about this error, or it will allow for you to decorate your properties an variables so that the object can be properly serialized. For instance, we could imagine something like this is being available.
After executing such code, our serialized JSON should state "{a:1, b:2}". As such, if we calls something like:
In so doing, the value of a and b will be restored and the parser will not expect a value for c. The java implementation of MyClass for the deserializeIt object, however, will provide the proper implementation for the c property.
This is why out-of-the-box serialization is a problem that hasn't been solved. If you frequently work with low-level languages, this doesn't make sense. But since maintaining the state of private variable is a BIG DEAL, it's not easy to serialize objects that can then be deserialized back into their original type.
I think the biggest problem for this type of implementation is that when serializing an object, frameworks such as .Net (or in this case Java) need to assure that once an object is serialized (either to JSON, XML or even to a binary-state) their must be assurance that any restoration from the serialized value, to a java object MUST restore the full state of the object.
Consider the following example to illustrate the problem.
Code:
public MyClass : object
private a;
private b;
public c {get a+b;}
constructor MyClass (int a, int b)
{
}
...
MyClass x = new MyClass(1, 2);
string json = MyClass.toJSONString();
We would hope/suspect that json would equal something like "{c:3}". There is nothing wrong with this but we have one big problem! Now we need to take our json value and create a new MyClass object. How do we do that?
We can't because we need to know the state of 'a' and 'b', in order to deserialize the JSON object and create a Java, MyClass object.
When you inherit from a serializer class (MyClass : SerialiableObject) the base serializer will either not care about this error, or it will allow for you to decorate your properties an variables so that the object can be properly serialized. For instance, we could imagine something like this is being available.
Code:
public MyClass : Serializable
//Attribute (is such a thing available in Java??? honestly, I don't know)
[Serialize=true, Deserialize=true]
private a;
[Serialize=true, Deserialize=true]
private b;
[Serialize=false]
public c {get a+b;}
constructor MyClass (int a, int b)
{
}
...
MyClass x = new MyClass(1, 2);
string json = MyClass.toJSONString();
After executing such code, our serialized JSON should state "{a:1, b:2}". As such, if we calls something like:
Code:
MyClass deserializeIt = MyClass.FromJSON(jsonStr);
In so doing, the value of a and b will be restored and the parser will not expect a value for c. The java implementation of MyClass for the deserializeIt object, however, will provide the proper implementation for the c property.
This is why out-of-the-box serialization is a problem that hasn't been solved. If you frequently work with low-level languages, this doesn't make sense. But since maintaining the state of private variable is a BIG DEAL, it's not easy to serialize objects that can then be deserialized back into their original type.
I understand that, I guess. Is there a base type (inherit to Java) that all of your objects could inherit from provides serialization out of the box? Assuming that all of your public properties are of value types and strings, such a base-type might offer the boilerplate, toJSON(...) method that you need. Then all you will need is is maps that are of Map
There is an out-of-the-box serialization, theoretically, I could override its methods, but it again will lead to too much code. The problem should have been solved several Java versions ago, what a shame.
In short, you may need to roll your own toJSONString() method (or methods) for your base-type(s) and then convert your Map to a Map and then just call any standard toJSON(...) call for Maps.
It's a standard way of doing such tasks but if I add all this syntactic sugar it will occupy 30% of all code LOL.
I understand that, I guess. Is there a base type (inherit to Java) that all of your objects could inherit from provides serialization out of the box? Assuming that all of your public properties are of value types and strings, such a base-type might offer the boilerplate, toJSON(...) method that you need. Then all you will need is is maps that are of Map
In short, you may need to roll your own toJSONString() method (or methods) for your base-type(s) and then convert your Map to a Map and then just call any standard toJSON(...) call for Maps.
It's a standard way of doing such tasks but if I add all this syntactic sugar it will occupy 30% of all code LOL.
Not a Java guy, but I'm not sure if their is (or should be) a straight-forward way to do this. The main issue is how would Java know how to serialize an "object" which, if my recollection is correct, is the most basic form of "object" of which all (reference) types inherit from.
Objects (if they are like they are in .Net) provide very little functionality for many reasons. I'd be surprised if Java has included a way to serialize an "object". Now, there is likely a straight-forward way to cast a Map (or something like that) but I highly doubt that if there is a canned way to do that.
In short, you may need to roll your own toJSONString() method (or methods) for your base-type(s) and then convert your Map to a Map and then just call any standard toJSON(...) call for Maps.
Objects (if they are like they are in .Net) provide very little functionality for many reasons. I'd be surprised if Java has included a way to serialize an "object". Now, there is likely a straight-forward way to cast a Map
In short, you may need to roll your own toJSONString() method (or methods) for your base-type(s) and then convert your Map
Does anyone know how to convert Map into JSON in Java 8 without external libraries?
The opposite task is done this way:
The opposite task is done this way:
Code:
final ScriptEngine scriptEngine = (new ScriptEngineManager()).getEngineByName("javascript");
final Map requestMap = (Map)scriptEngine.eval("Java.asJSONCompatible(" + requestString + ")"); 
IOTA has been accepted into Wanxiang's Blockchain Lab grant programme: http://www.blockchainlabs.org/blockgrant-x-en/
Cong.IOTA got 4000 USD award.
I note Wanxiang make no mantion of the "Quantum Secure" property/design/goal of IOTA.
Did they examine/consider it in their analysis? Thanks
I mentioned it in the grant form, so they are certainly aware of it.
Excellent and thanks for the quick reply. Just a quick follow-up Q if you dont mind.
To quote Wanxiang:
The first stage of the funding will be executed soon, provided that the winners are willing to accept this final amount for their applications and still be able to commit to the milestones in their application. The second and third stage of the funding will be granted based on respective milestones. Wanxiang Blockchain Labs will be contacting the winning projects regarding the procedure.
This suggests you have established "milestones" in your application and based upon your achievement of these to then continue to stages 2 and 3.
If so then may we know what these milestones are?
Milestones are to launch beta, launch full IOTA and then forma organisation/foundation to actively pursue interested parties to grow adoption.
Good stuff. Cheers.
IOTA has been accepted into Wanxiang's Blockchain Lab grant programme: http://www.blockchainlabs.org/blockgrant-x-en/
Cong.IOTA got 4000 USD award.
I note Wanxiang make no mantion of the "Quantum Secure" property/design/goal of IOTA.
Did they examine/consider it in their analysis? Thanks
I mentioned it in the grant form, so they are certainly aware of it.
Excellent and thanks for the quick reply. Just a quick follow-up Q if you dont mind.
To quote Wanxiang:
The first stage of the funding will be executed soon, provided that the winners are willing to accept this final amount for their applications and still be able to commit to the milestones in their application. The second and third stage of the funding will be granted based on respective milestones. Wanxiang Blockchain Labs will be contacting the winning projects regarding the procedure.
This suggests you have established "milestones" in your application and based upon your achievement of these to then continue to stages 2 and 3.
If so then may we know what these milestones are?
Milestones are to launch beta, launch full IOTA and then forma organisation/foundation to actively pursue interested parties to grow adoption.
IOTA has been accepted into Wanxiang's Blockchain Lab grant programme: http://www.blockchainlabs.org/blockgrant-x-en/
Cong.IOTA got 4000 USD award.
I note Wanxiang make no mantion of the "Quantum Secure" property/design/goal of IOTA.
Did they examine/consider it in their analysis? Thanks
I mentioned it in the grant form, so they are certainly aware of it.
Excellent and thanks for the quick reply. Just a quick follow-up Q if you dont mind.
To quote Wanxiang:
The first stage of the funding will be executed soon, provided that the winners are willing to accept this final amount for their applications and still be able to commit to the milestones in their application. The second and third stage of the funding will be granted based on respective milestones. Wanxiang Blockchain Labs will be contacting the winning projects regarding the procedure.
This suggests you have established "milestones" in your application and based upon your achievement of these to then continue to stages 2 and 3.
If so then may we know what these milestones are?
IOTA has been accepted into Wanxiang's Blockchain Lab grant programme: http://www.blockchainlabs.org/blockgrant-x-en/
Cong.IOTA got 4000 USD award.
I note Wanxiang make no mantion of the "Quantum Secure" property/design/goal of IOTA.
Did they examine/consider it in their analysis? Thanks
I mentioned it in the grant form, so they are certainly aware of it.
IOTA has been accepted into Wanxiang's Blockchain Lab grant programme: http://www.blockchainlabs.org/blockgrant-x-en/
Cong.IOTA got 4000 USD award.
I note Wanxiang make no mantion of the "Quantum Secure" property/design/goal of IOTA.
Did they examine/consider it in their analysis? Thanks
@Hueristic, deleted your post for ad hominem.
I think that's a nice way of saying trolling. LOL
I'm not a fan of post deletion although in this case it saves me the time calling out members of that community for always using that term, as though they had received a sponsorship deal from that drink company. Cool.
Jump to: