[erlang-questions] No JSON/MAPS interoperability in 17.0?
Sun Mar 9 19:35:24 CET 2014
It would be a bad idea to standardize something that nobody uses yet. How
will we know if they got it right? Once it's in there, we're stuck with it.
Arguably we should've had some JSON library by Erlang 16, but the community
never really settled on a standard representation or API.
Erlang 18 would be a much better time to add a standard maps-using JSON
library. Perhaps even a lower level streaming parser too.
On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Anthony Ramine <n.oxyde@REDACTED> wrote:
> What about the utter lack of proper specifications around JSON? The fact
> that you always have to think about where the JSON will be injected?
> What about a JSON-encoded string containing "</script>", should that be
> avoided by Erlang’s builtin parser? What about "]]>"? What about the two
> Just because other languages include such a thing doesn’t mean Erlang
> should too. If diversity is not a reason to reject it, other languages
> providing it is not a reason to include it either.
> Anthony Ramine
> Le 9 mars 2014 à 15:56, liuyanghejerry <liuyanghejerry@REDACTED> a écrit :
> > 于 2014/3/8 22:01, Anthony Ramine 写道:
> >> The problem is not about what is accepted, it’s about how one’s
> (un)parser works. Sometimes you want a streaming-like API, sometimes the
> whole tree, etc. The Postel principle is orthogonal here.
> > So, all languages with JSON module in their standard library seems
> unbelievable? Because people need different parsers, so we give them no
> parser? I don't think this is a reason for rejecting it.
> > _______________________________________________
> > erlang-questions mailing list
> > erlang-questions@REDACTED
> > http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> erlang-questions mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions