On 9/5/14 2:04 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
Ned Batchelder <n...@nedbatchelder.com>:
I don't understand how JSON has flopped? The parser may be a bit more
complex (but not much, it isn't hard to examine the first few bytes),
but you're using off-the-shelf parsers anyway, so why are you
concerned by this?
There are occasions where you need to take shortcuts. Say you need to
glean information from JSON with bash, grep, awk or straight C. If JSON
was fixed to UTF-8, that would be quite feasible. Being as it is, you
are bound to 3rd-party libraries.
That alone invites ad-hoc encodings. For example, I have run into
"asterisked" JSON, libraries that limit themselves to UTF-8.
Compare that with HTTP, SMTP, or even XML(!). They fix the encoding to
the bit. No need for completely unnecessary options.
I see what you mean about JSON, but you are mistaken about HTTP and XML.
Neither of them dictates the encoding of the data, and both of them
offer ways to declare the encoding. This means XML parsers must be
prepared for many different encodings.
Marko
--
Ned Batchelder, http://nedbatchelder.com
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
