[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-19?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13231060#comment-13231060
]
Thomas Mueller commented on OAK-19:
-----------------------------------
Yes, the parsers at org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.json offer a higher level
abstraction than what is in org.apache.jackrabbit.mk.json. Within MicroKernel
implementations, possibly the low-level abstractions are sufficient (a StAX
parser for example), but within other components the high-level abstractions
(DOM based / event based) make sense. I believe the high-level abstractions
could be built on top of the low-level abstractions.
According to my tests, avoiding to generate String is a lot faster (as it
completely avoids escaping / de-escaping and copying), and requires much less
memory. This is the reason for JsopStream.
I wonder if we should try to keep all json / jsop related stuff in one project,
and if yes in which one.
> Consolidate JSON utilities
> --------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-19
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-19
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: core, jcr
> Reporter: angela
>
> i seems confusing to me that we are having multiple different json utilities
> in the
> current oak stack:
> - a dependency to google-json
> - a complete json utility including parser, json abstraction in oak-jcr
> (org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.json)
> - another json utility in org.apache.jackrabbit.mk.json containing tokenizer
> et. al.
> imo we should only have one single json utility and i would therefore suggest
> that
> we discuss this issue and try to reach a consensus which json-library we want
> to use.
> what do you think?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
