Am 22.08.2014 19:24, schrieb "Marc Schütz" <schue...@gmx.net>":
On Friday, 22 August 2014 at 16:48:44 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
Actually they take exactly the same parameters and just differ in
their return value. It would be more descriptive to name them
parseAsJSONValue and parseAsJSONStream - or maybe parseJSONAsValue or
parseJSONToValue? The current naming is somewhat modeled after
std.conv's "to!T" and "parse!T".
... why not use exactly the same convention then? => `parse!JSONValue`
Would be nice to have a "pluggable" API where you just need to specify
the type in a factory method to choose the input format. Then there
could be `parse!BSON`, `parse!YAML`, with the same style as
`parse!(int[])`.
I know this sound a bit like bike-shedding, but the API shouldn't stand
by itself, but fit into the "big picture", especially as there will
probably be other parsers (you already named the module std._data_.json).
That would be nice, but then it should also work together with std.conv,
which basically is exactly this pluggable API. Just like this it would
result in an ambiguity error if both std.data.json and std.conv are
imported at the same time.
Is there a way to make std.conv work properly with JSONValue? I guess
the only theoretical way would be to put something in JSONValue, but
that would result in a slightly ugly cyclic dependency between parser.d
and value.d.
