Hi Jean-Baptiste,
Am 29.06.2009 um 11:09 schrieb Jean-Baptiste BRIAUD -- Novlog:
> I can see that current JavaRPC is using JSONObject form json.org.
> Few questions :
>
> 1. Apparently, this is delivered from json.org directly with Java
> source text files. What about version ? No CVS/SVN ? No Jar files ?
> Should I copy/past again from json.org in order to update this code ?
In the beginning, the code was synced with the json.org version once
in a while. However, it has also been extended for Date support (look
for "// AJ" in the code), so you can't just blindly copy the latest
version. It would be a good idea to put this into a new package to
make it clear that the implementation has been modified. Of course, I
should have done this from the start, sorry about that :-(
> 2. Should I check other libs or does JSONObject still the right
> choice ? Anyone to give me some historic background about this choice
> like known pro/cons, ... things I should know before jumping, ...
There hasn't been any evaluation. json.org as the "primary JSON site"
seemed like a logical choice, and the implementation works well
enough. Of course you're free to evaluate alternatives, but keep in
mind that Date support would have to be added to whatever library you
choose. There has been some discussion about keeping qooxdoo's special
date handling or not - see
http://bugzilla.qooxdoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1400
Maybe it's time to revisit that. But anyway, I think sticking to
the modified json.org implementation is fine for now (there are enough
other things to do ...).
> 3. Current JavaRPC users, did you find any lack in the Java <-> JSON I
> should know ?
Not that I know of.
Regards,
Andreas J.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
qooxdoo-devel mailing list
qooxdoo-devel@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
