tj at crowdersoftware.com
Sun Jun 10 14:49:51 PDT 2012
On 10 June 2012 22:44, Oliver Hunt <oliver at apple.com> wrote:
> My original implementation in JSC was as an Array, but I found that there
> were sites that depended on .stack being a string if it was present. Any
> form of string encoding we expect to be machine parseable by necessity will
> require escaping and full format description. I've actually been tempted
> to switch JSC's current icky format into JSON on the basis that JSON is
> already well defined, and everyone has fast encoders and decoders for JSON
> these days.
Wouldn't changing the existing format of the string break existing code
without offering any real benefit over continuing the existing format of
that string (for now) but adding a new structured property that code could
take advantage of? Not seeing much point in the browser generating JSON
that just has to be decoded by anyone who wants to use it (fast or not).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss