News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Douglas Crockford: Why I removed comments from JSON. Parent comment

Re:Douglas Crockford: Why I removed comments from JSON by dlubarov on Tuesday May 01, 2012 @03:48AM (#3913399)
What if you need to encode arbitrary dictionaries, which may have keys like "//", rather than objects with specific named attributes?

And what if you want multiple comments in the same scope (say, a comment before each attribute)? From the RFC: "The names within an object SHOULD be unique." In practice parsers will just override values, as JS does, but I think it would be legal to reject JSON with duplicate keys.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Douglas Crockford: Why I removed comments from JSON by polemic on Tuesday May 01, 2012 @05:02AM (#3913530)
IMHO, the complexity that this would introduce just highlights why it's a good idea not to have them.

> "but I think it would be legal to reject JSON with duplicate keys."

No it would not. `SHOULD` has a very specific meaning:

  SHOULD   This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
    may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
    particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
    carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
See http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt

An object with duplicate keys must be parsed, but the exactly result will be implementation specific (undefined).

[ Parent | on HN ]