Hi, this is another reason to start thinking about using a "real" JSON parser instead of using a simple string parser. As in the other thread about comments, I think if a simple string parser isn't enough, use an existing one, for example Apache Johnzon[1]. In that case you don't have to worry about the parser fulfilling any specs as that one surely does.
regards, Achim [1] - http://johnzon.apache.org/ 2017-02-21 8:41 GMT+01:00 David Leangen <[email protected]>: > > I don’t particularly see a problem with it. > > +1 (for keeping, non binding) > > > Cheers, > =David > > > > > On Feb 21, 2017, at 4:34 PM, Stefan Seifert <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > i created FELIX-5556 to make sure JSON object order is retained when > parsing a JSON file, and reverted the commit after the complaint from felix. > > > > background: > > - the original JSON spec [1] clearly defined JSON objects "is an > unordered collection" > > - the revised JSON spec [2] states the same, but adds an additional > paragraph > > > > "JSON parsing libraries have been observed to differ as to whether or > > not they make the ordering of object members visible to calling > > software. Implementations whose behavior does not depend on member > > ordering will be interoperable in the sense that they will not be > > affected by these differences." > > > > do we want to support it in the felix utils JSONParser? seems to set > wrong expectations following the spec, but other much used libs as gson and > jackson seem to do it by default. so if no one votes to explicitly support > it i will cancel FELIX-5556. > > > > stefan > > > > [1] https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4627.txt > > [2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7159 > > > -- Apache Member Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer & Project Lead blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS> Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master
