Update impls.html

[rumpelsepp]

Add https://github.com/fxamacker/cbor and remove incomplete implementation

[cabo]

So what is the state of 2tvenom's implementation?

[rumpelsepp]

According to github, it seems unmaintained for the last 2 years and has at least these known issues (from the readme):

• Not support tags. 6 major type (in future)
• Not support 16 floats encoding
• Not decode nil (null) vars
• Encode does't support indefinite-length values.

[cabo]

According to github, it seems unmaintained for the last 2 years

Yes, I saw that. Is the other implementation you are referencing compatible (at least vaguely)?
Or are they completely unrelated?

and has at least these known issues (from the readme):

• Not support tags. 6 major type (in future)

Neither does the fxamacker one, AFACS.

• Not support 16 floats encoding

OK

• Not decode nil (null) vars

That is a limitation.

• Encode does't support indefinite-length values.

Does the fxamacker one?

Just trying to find out if the 2tvenom one should stay in or is wholeheartedly replaced. Maybe I should contact 2tvenom.

[rumpelsepp]

Yes, I saw that. Is the other implementation you are referencing compatible (at least vaguely)?

Would say so. Same API design.

Does the fxamacker one?

I'll ask him.

[fxamacker]

Hi,

I maintain fxamacker/cbor. Thanks for considering it.

Not support tags. 6 major type

My decoder ignores tags but decodes tagged data. Encoder does not support tags yet.

Encode does't support indefinite-length values.

My decoder supports indefinite-length values for bytes/strings/arrays/maps. Encoder doesn't support it yet.

By comparison, 2tvenom/cbor doesn't appear to support decoding indefinite-length values, based on a quick look at 2tvenom/cbor/cbor.go.

Thanks again,

Faye

[rumpelsepp]

Encode does't support indefinite-length values.

Does the fxamacker one?

Since the last release it does.

https://github.com/fxamacker/cbor/releases/tag/v0.2.0

[rumpelsepp]

@cabo Do you expect me to change this pull request in any way? I am happy to incorporate any feedback.

[fxamacker]

I released fxamacker/cbor v1.0. Changes are summarized here.

Please let me know if you have any questions or suggestions. Thanks.

[rumpelsepp]

@cabo The mentioned cbor implementation evolved rapidly and is now in a state that I recommend adding to the website. The README now covers information to all limitations and there is a roadmap as well.

[fxamacker]

@cabo Hello! I released fxamacker/cbor 2.1. It is a fast, safe, and full-featured generic CBOR encoder and decoder in Go.

Compared to the best Go impl listed on cbor.io, it is more full-featured, faster, uses less memory, produces smaller data, and produces smaller apps (see comparisons below).

Please let me know if there's anything that's preventing fxamacker/cbor from being listed. I can provide a PR if you prefer not to replace an existing Go impl. Thanks!

fxamacker/cbor 2.1 supports:

• CBOR tags (API supports built-in and user-defined tags).
• Preferred serialization, including IEEE 754 binary16.
• Duplicate map key detection (option to enforce or ignore).
• Indefinite length data for encoding and decoding.
• Sort options: unsorted, length-first and bytewise-lexicographic.
• Encoder options for floating-point shortest form, NaN, and Infinity.
• Decoder checks for well-formedness and validates data.
• Decoder doesn't crash and avoids resource exhaustion from malformed/malicious CBOR data.

More info at: Encoder and Decoder Options, and Standards

Here's how fxamacker/cbor compares to the best Go library currently listed on cbor.io using using test data from RFC 8392 A.1 for speed and memory comparisons.

Safety Comparison

	fxamacker/cbor 2.1	ugorji/go 1.1.7
Bad data 1	57.4 ns/op, 32 B/op, 1 allocs/op	⚠️ fatal error: out of memory
Bad data 2	67.7 ns/op, 32 B/op, 1 allocs/op	⚠️ runtime: out of memory: cannot allocate

Compiled Program Size Comparison

	fxamacker/cbor 2.1	ugorji/go 1.1.7
Custom app	2.7 MB	11.9 MB
cisco/senml	7.6 MB	12 MB

Speed Comparison (lower ns/op is better)

	fxamacker/cbor 2.1	ugorji/go 1.1.7
Encode CWT	457 ns/op	995 ns/op
Decode CWT	796 ns/op	1105 ns/op

Memory Comparison (lower numbers are better)

	fxamacker/cbor 2.1	ugorji/go 1.1.7
Encode CWT	176 B/op, 2 allocs/op	1424 B/op, 4 allocs/op
Decode CWT	176 B/op, 6 allocs/op	568 B/op, 6 allocs/op

[cabo]

Thank you for this interesting implementation, and apologies for my glacial speed merging the pointer to this.