slightly off-topic, but this would be relevant for nodejs database-driver authors contemplating BigInt support.
here's the the tentative roadmap for indexeddb support for bigint [1]: Design decisions: BigInts compare greater than Number and less than everything else No type coercion between BigInt and Number; they are simply distinct, unrelated keys, even if mathematically equal No BigInt autoIncrement support--53 bits should be enough for anyone BigInts and BigInt wrappers are proposed to be made serializable, and therefore available as IndexedDB values, in whatwg/html#3480 <https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/3480> Addresses #230 <https://github.com/w3c/IndexedDB/issues/230> [1] github pull-request - Allow BigInts as IndexedDB keys #231 https://github.com/w3c/IndexedDB/pull/231 <https://github.com/w3c/IndexedDB/pull/231> > On 26 May 2018, at 11:47 PM, kai zhu <kaizhu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > fyi, there was extensive discussion on whether you can JSON.stringify BigInt, > in the BigInt proposal [1]. the consensus is that you cannot [2]: > > Here's <https://tc39.github.io/proposal-bigint/#sec-serializejsonproperty> > the relevant JSON spec and here's > <https://tc39.github.io/proposal-bigint/#sec-tostring-applied-to-the-bigint-type> > the relevant String spec. Reading them, they say that JSON.stringify(1234n) > throws (as discussed previously > <https://github.com/tc39/proposal-bigint/issues/24>) and String(1234n) gives > "1234". > > > > [1] github issue - Support JSON serialisation of BigInt values #24 > https://github.com/tc39/proposal-bigint/issues/24#issuecomment-290200829 > <https://github.com/tc39/proposal-bigint/issues/24#issuecomment-290200829> > > [2] github issue - spec and README.md are unclear what serialized form of > BigInt looks like using .toJSON / .toString > https://github.com/tc39/proposal-bigint/issues/124 > <https://github.com/tc39/proposal-bigint/issues/124> > > kai zhu > kaizhu...@gmail.com <mailto:kaizhu...@gmail.com> > > > >> On 20 May 2018, at 11:12 PM, Richard Gibson <richard.gib...@gmail.com >> <mailto:richard.gib...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> That seems like a question best addressed by something like JSON Schema. >> ECMAScript is not unique in lacking sufficient native machinery to process >> JSON numbers that have no IEEE 754 64-bit representation, and similar issues >> exist for binary data and complex types like date/time values. >> >> On Sunday, May 20, 2018, Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren....@gmail.com >> <mailto:anders.rundgren....@gmail.com>> wrote: >> My question was really how non-ES systems preferable should "talk numbers" >> to ES when using JSON: >> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2018-May/050889.html >> <https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2018-May/050889.html> >> >> Anders >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> es-disc...@mozilla.org <mailto:es-disc...@mozilla.org> >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> <https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss> >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> es-disc...@mozilla.org <mailto:es-disc...@mozilla.org> >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > -- Job board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ New group rules: https://gist.github.com/othiym23/9886289#file-moderation-policy-md Old group rules: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to nodejs+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to nodejs@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/nodejs/12CB7E32-7553-4CFD-886A-A242E7CE9E4F%40gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
