On Thu, 2 May 2013 04:49:27 +0100 Michael Blumenkrantz
said:
> On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 1:04 AM, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 1 May 2013 14:56:32 +0100 Michael Blumenkrantz
> > said:
> >
> > > cJSON, at least, exposes no hashes, lists, or any of that; I don't know
> > > what crazy parser
No, we added SOAP.
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 6:22 AM, David Seikel wrote:
> Er, somehow this thread went from "stop the JSON madness" to "this is
> how we should do JSON"? I need caffeine, I'm not keeping up. Though I
> blame E, it's dog slow now. Did someone add JSON? :-P
>
> --
> A big old s
Er, somehow this thread went from "stop the JSON madness" to "this is
how we should do JSON"? I need caffeine, I'm not keeping up. Though I
blame E, it's dog slow now. Did someone add JSON? :-P
--
A big old stinking pile of genius that no one wants
coz there are too many silver coated monkeys
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 1:04 AM, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> On Wed, 1 May 2013 14:56:32 +0100 Michael Blumenkrantz
> said:
>
> > cJSON, at least, exposes no hashes, lists, or any of that; I don't know
> > what crazy parsers you kids have been using which do this, but they
> > shouldn't since JSON d
On Wed, 1 May 2013 14:56:32 +0100 Michael Blumenkrantz
said:
> cJSON, at least, exposes no hashes, lists, or any of that; I don't know
> what crazy parsers you kids have been using which do this, but they
> shouldn't since JSON doesn't have any concept of such things.
errr.. json is really a tre
cJSON, at least, exposes no hashes, lists, or any of that; I don't know
what crazy parsers you kids have been using which do this, but they
shouldn't since JSON doesn't have any concept of such things.
This is all the code I have which uses an external JSON parser at present.
It serializes and des
On Wed, 1 May 2013 14:26:12 +0100 Michael Blumenkrantz
said:
that makes sense.. but it seems that its already done. as per my comment.. if
its exporting eina lists/hashes etc... then it pretty much has to be a newly
written json parser as it has to deal with our datatypes. otherwise we just
conve
On 01/05/13 14:15, Cedric BAIL wrote:
> WTF ! I am not saying that without a benchmark ! Where do you think
> that came from ? Just random praising for the fun ?
You said you haven't tested cJSON, only json-c. I asked you about it!>
> Because there is no complexity there. It just work. There is no
One of the reasons for not doing this is to not do it; you save those
developer resources and put them towards something useful. Saying "I'll
have a branch with it implemented soon" completely ignores that.
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 2:22 PM, daniel.za...@samsung.com <
daniel.za...@samsung.com> wrote
On 05/01/2013 04:02 PM, Tom Hacohen wrote:
> On 01/05/13 13:13, Cedric BAIL wrote:
>> On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Tom Hacohen wrote:
>>> It recently came to my attention (a week ago) that JackDanielZ is
>>> writing a JSON parser to go into the EFL.
>>> I've been arguing against it on IRC, but
On 01/05/13 13:13, Cedric BAIL wrote:
> On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Tom Hacohen wrote:
>> It recently came to my attention (a week ago) that JackDanielZ is
>> writing a JSON parser to go into the EFL.
>> I've been arguing against it on IRC, but I think it's time to post it here.
>>
>> Although
On Wed, 1 May 2013 21:13:37 +0900 Cedric BAIL said:
> On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Tom Hacohen wrote:
> > It recently came to my attention (a week ago) that JackDanielZ is
> > writing a JSON parser to go into the EFL.
> > I've been arguing against it on IRC, but I think it's time to post it h
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Tom Hacohen wrote:
> It recently came to my attention (a week ago) that JackDanielZ is
> writing a JSON parser to go into the EFL.
> I've been arguing against it on IRC, but I think it's time to post it here.
>
> Although most of us (some more than others) suffer fr
On 01/05/13 11:12, David Seikel wrote:
> On Wed, 1 May 2013 10:43:39 +0100 Michael Blumenkrantz
> wrote:
>
>> I argued vehemently against having an xml parser in eina, and the same
>> principle applies here. Too bad I seem to always be on the losing
>> side of these types of decisions.
>
> /me pus
On Wed, 1 May 2013 20:12:25 +1000 David Seikel
wrote:
> On Wed, 1 May 2013 10:43:39 +0100 Michael Blumenkrantz
> wrote:
>
> > I argued vehemently against having an xml parser in eina, and the
> > same principle applies here. Too bad I seem to always be on the
> > losing side of these types of d
On Wed, 1 May 2013 10:43:39 +0100 Michael Blumenkrantz
wrote:
> I argued vehemently against having an xml parser in eina, and the same
> principle applies here. Too bad I seem to always be on the losing
> side of these types of decisions.
/me pushes Mike to the pro JSON side, so it looses.
> On
I argued vehemently against having an xml parser in eina, and the same
principle applies here. Too bad I seem to always be on the losing side of
these types of decisions.
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 10:38 AM, Tom Hacohen wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> It recently came to my attention (a week ago) that JackDa
Hey guys,
It recently came to my attention (a week ago) that JackDanielZ is
writing a JSON parser to go into the EFL.
I've been arguing against it on IRC, but I think it's time to post it here.
Although most of us (some more than others) suffer from a severe case of
NIH, I think this is really
18 matches
Mail list logo
