Re:JSON-Based Universal Messaging Format (2017)
by zeveb on Thursday June 14, 2018 @10:26AM
(#17311900)
> People are already used that in dynamic languages (javascript, python, ruby), you can work with unknown structures in a performant way, and they will be mapped properly to the underlying data model.
That's actually one of my concerns with JSON: it doesn't really convey the underlying data model. Sure, it can handle numbers — but it can't handle constraints like 'age must be positive.' Sure, it can handle strings — but there's no way in JSON to differentiate between Base64-encoded bytes & a normal string.
JSON lets one play with data, but one never knows if it's actually valid. It's dynamic typing, applied to data itself.
Re:JSON-Based Universal Messaging Format (2017)
by theamk on Friday June 15, 2018 @01:55PM
(#17321947)
Exactly, it conveys underlying data model of dynamic languages, or to be specific, of a common subset of their data types.
As for data validity, this is completely separate question. I don't believe that validation should be a part of the language or data format -- my language lets me write 'age = "yellow"', and so should my data format.
Yes, it is. People are already used that in dynamic languages (javascript, python, ruby), you can work with unknown structures in a performant way, and they will be mapped properly to the underlying data model.
They are not going to switch to something where you need to have a schema just to parse it properly.