On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 9:16 PM Isiah Meadows <isiahmead...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> The way this conversation is going, we might as well just create a
> schema-based JSON serialization DSL for both parsing and stringifying.
> But I don't really see that as helpful in the *language itself* at
> least as a mandatory part of the spec (maybe an optional built-in
> module).
>
> I've in the past few months seen similar things come up a few times
> already. I like the idea of a built-in schema-based JSON validator +
> parser (it'd be faster than what we currently have), but most things
> out there suck in some way, mostly just being boilerplatey, and
> there's a lot of design work to get out of the way first before you
> can come up with something that doesn't.
>
> But as it stands, the only things I'd support for the `JSON` global itself
> are:
>
> 1. Adding separate prototypes for `JSON.stringify(source, options)`
> and `JSON.parse(source, options)`, so it's easier to extend and
> comprehend the arguments.
> 2. Adding an option to parse anything consisting of purely digits (no
> exponent or decimal) as a BigInt, regardless of size.
>
This won't work....
``` desired object
{ a : 123, b : 123n }
```
``` json
{ "a":123 ,
"b":123 }
```
function test( json ) {
var c = json.a * 5;
var BIc = json.b * 5n;
}
if long numbers only translate to bigint (and small as Number); the calc
for 'BIc' fails.
if everything is translated to bigint the calc for 'c' fails.
3. Adding an option to stringify BigInts into integer-only numbers and
> normal numbers into unconditional floats.
>
>
> These could be either separate methods or part of a 4th options argument.
>
>
Well; Since JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) there's now available to JS a
feature that an 'n' suffix can be applied to a number. Seems JSON should
just inherit that.
Although I would like to see a better method than eval() to translate the
input string from JSON for say { d : 123n }; right now within JS I'd have
to use EVAL; in V8 I could just create a BigInt::new()....
(and RE: eval, not saying it's a GOOD solution; it's just apparently the
only solution ATM; other than splicing the string.)
> -----
>
> Isiah Meadows
> m...@isiahmeadows.com
> www.isiahmeadows.com
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 6:52 PM, Michael J. Ryan <track...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Out of bounds as you'd still have to parse it, but for encoding, could
> add
> > BigInt.prototype.toJSON ...
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018, 15:44 Andrea Giammarchi <
> andrea.giammar...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> I guess a better example would've been `Boolean('false')` returns true,
> >> but yeah, I've moved slightly forward already with everything, if you
> read
> >> other messages.
> >>
> >> Regards.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 12:06 AM Waldemar Horwat <walde...@google.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 07/17/2018 04:27 AM, Andrea Giammarchi wrote:
> >>> > actually, never mind ... but I find it hilarious that
> >>> > BigInt('55555555555555555550000000000000000000001') works but
> >>> > BigInt('55555555555555555550000000000000000000001n') doesn't ^_^;;
> >>>
> >>> That's no different from how other built-in types work.
> String('"foo"')
> >>> doesn't give you the same string as the string literal "foo".
> >>>
> >>> Waldemar
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> es-discuss mailing list
> >> es-discuss@mozilla.org
> >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > es-discuss mailing list
> > es-discuss@mozilla.org
> > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
> >
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss@mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
