[erlang-questions] No JSON/MAPS interoperability in 17.0?

liuyanghejerry liuyanghejerry@REDACTED
Mon Mar 10 12:56:02 CET 2014

于 2014/3/10 18:14, Anthony Ramine 写道:
> I didn’t assume anything about your own knowledge so feel free to do the same.
> Even jsx, the most popular Erlang JSON lib, has options to handle these issues.

于 2014/3/10 18:07, Jesper Louis Andersen 写道:
> Hi,
> Some important points to consider:
> * If you put a library into stdlib, it becomes a slow moving target. 
> That is, changes to this library will take months. Since maps are so 
> new, it would be better to iterate the library outside the standard 
> release in any case. Cutting down the OTP standard libraries is an 
> important goal since it unties the hands of the OTP team so they have 
> to maintain less code.
> * I think the parsing/unparsing is the least of the problems to 
> handle. We can, with proper options, work around oddities that doesn't 
> follow the standard correctly in both directions.
> * The library API however, is going to be hard to tackle. Some will 
> want a C-NIF because lolspeed. Some will want stability and an 
> implementation in Erlang. Some will want SAX-style parsing and some 
> just wants a term fully decoded. Some will want an enumerator/iteratee 
> pattern for chunked decoding over a socket. Some will hate streaming. 
> Some will like to inject transforming functions into the JSON parser. 
> Some will want the ability to turn JSON objects into erlang records. 
> And so on. Any implementation will only support a subset of this.
> The different implementations have differing guarantees. I think this 
> is good because we avoid one-library-to-rule-them-all and the bad 
> design symptoms it brings.

Okay, then. I didn't consider that much. Is there anything like 
"playground" for experimental libraries? Start JSON library there may be 

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list