[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Native vs Elisp JSON key serialisation
From: |
Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: |
Re: Native vs Elisp JSON key serialisation |
Date: |
Sat, 5 Dec 2020 21:34:44 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 |
On 28.07.2020 21:16, Basil L. Contovounesios wrote:
While looking at bug#42545, I noticed some inconsistencies in object key
serialisation between json-encode and json-serialize.
When serialising hash tables:
- json-encode translates the keys 'foo, :foo, and "foo" to "foo"
- json-serialize translates "foo" to "foo"
(and rejects symbols as keys)
I don't have a problem with this; it makes sense to me that json.c is
stricter, and json.el is older so has more backward compatibility to
maintain. In other words, the two implementations are sufficiently
consistent IMO.
IDK, we might add those, sooner or later. Not sure why we would
explicitly want to reject symbols as keys. But perhaps the author just
wanted to avoid the decision on how to translate them. ;-)
/Cc'ing Philipp here.
When serialising alists:
- json-encode translates 'foo, :foo, and "foo" to "foo"
- json-serialize translates 'foo to "foo", and :foo to ":foo"
(and rejects strings as keys)
Here the two implementations are inconsistent. Should the older
json-encode also translate :foo to ":foo", or should the newer and more
prominently (in the Elisp manual) documented json-serialize translate
:foo to "foo"?
The latter, probably?
The older package might be not as well documented, but it should have
better compatibility with existing code. Although, given that we haven't
seen any reports regarding that (right?), the choice in the other
direction is conceivable too.
When serialising plists:
- json-encode translates :foo to "foo" (and interprets 'foo and "foo" as
starting an array rather than associative object)
- json-serialize translates 'foo and :foo to "foo"
(and rejects strings as keys)
Here the two implementations are again inconsistent. Should json-encode
also accept plists with non-keyword symbols as keys, or should
json-serialize accept only keywords as keys?
Seems like json-serialize is inconsistent with itself here (:foo turns
into "foo", unlike the previous case).
I think using keyword symbols to distinguish plists is a clever idea,
and json-encode could adopt it too (even despite backward compatibility
concerns). But that case maps :foo to "foo", so json-serialize and
json-encode should do that in other cases, too.
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: Native vs Elisp JSON key serialisation,
Dmitry Gutov <=