JSONNumber - optional decimal

Mark S. Miller erights at google.com
Wed Jun 9 07:55:07 PDT 2010


On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 7:43 AM, Douglas Crockford <douglas at crockford.com>wrote:

> On 11:59 AM, Oliver Hunt wrote:
>
>> That said I think allowing '1.' (etc) makes sense as it's fairly standard
>> across multiple programming languages, and I am unaware of any specific
>> reason for disallowing it.
>>
>> In the long term I don't see changing the grammar to allow a trailing
>> period as being harmful as it's a relaxation.  In the short term vendors
>> that follow the spec may fail to parse content :-(
>>
>>
> I think that would be a mistake. We have seen lots of tragic cases on the
> web where if we allow deviation from good practice, then those deviations
> will surely occur. In the long run, that could seriously and unnecessarily
> impair JSON interoperability with non-JavaScript endpoints. That might be
> worth considering if there were some compensating benefit, but in this case
> there isn't one. Deviating from the JSON grammar would be a bad tradeoff.


+1. Prior to ES5, there did not seem to be any way within JS to create a
library that was simultaneously fast, safe, and validating. <
http://code.google.com/p/json-sans-eval/> is a perfectly fine fast and safe
library. It's only downside is that it wasn't validating. Let's not retreat
back to a non-validating JSON parser.



>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>



-- 
    Cheers,
    --MarkM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20100609/5c1a213c/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list