Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 8 years ago
It may be a convenient extension for some applications but we need to carefully
think
of the following items:
- It's not part of JSON spec (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4627.txt)
- We have to develop an extension grammar (in BNF or other forms) to JSON spec
and
make compatible to original one
- It may confuse some of users (we have some users who don't like the extension
of
JSON spec in the implementation, see comments on
http://code.google.com/p/json-simple/wiki/DecodingExamples#Notes_-_Multithreadin
g_and_extensions).
So I am a bit reluctant to add this feature.
Original comment by fangyid...@gmail.com
on 17 Mar 2010 at 8:37
I did notice these discussions earlier. I am definitely sympathetic to both
sides,
although I would find this extension useful. Allow me to ask a few questions
which
might simplify your decisions:
- if I were to provide a patch for this, would you accept it?
- if I were to provide a patch for this and the requested "strict" mode, would
you
accept that?
Original comment by matt.fowles
on 17 Mar 2010 at 3:01
That will be great!
May I ask what the grammar for the single quoted strings is?
And may I have a look at the codes?
Thanks.
Original comment by fangyid...@gmail.com
on 17 Mar 2010 at 4:16
The grammar for string would become:
string := double_quote_string | single_quote_string ;
double_quote_string := " double_quote__char* " ;
single_quote_string := ' single_quote_char* ' ;
double_quote_char := any-Unicode-character-except-"-or-\-or-control-character
| \"
| escape_sequence ;
single_quote_char := any-Unicode-character-except-'-or-\-or-control-character
| \'
| escape_sequence ;
escape_sequence := \\ | \/ | \b | \f | \n | \r | \t | \u four-hex-digits ;
I have not written the code yet because I was not sure if you would accept the
patch or
not.
Original comment by matt.fowles
on 17 Mar 2010 at 5:06
Thanks a lot for providing the grammar. It looks good.
And it seems the changes will have non-trivial impacts on the existing codes.
Could
you provide a sample scenario which requires this enhancement? We need to make
sure
why we need such kind of enhancement.
Thanks.
Original comment by fangyid...@gmail.com
on 18 Mar 2010 at 5:51
When hardcoding JSON in Java, the string within string issue becomes quite
annoying:
String json = "{ \"asdf\" : \"qwer\\\"zxcv\" }"
vs
String json = "{ 'asdf' : 'qwer\"zxcv' }"
Also, because xml allows either form of quoting for attributes, copying and
pasting
strings from xml requires extra work converting.
Original comment by matt.fowles
on 18 Mar 2010 at 3:03
I still haven't implemented this because I was waiting on some sort of
indication as to whether or not the code would be accepted. Sorry for the long
delay in response, but life got distracting.
Original comment by matt.fowles
on 8 Jun 2010 at 3:30
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
matt.fowles
on 16 Mar 2010 at 6:45