From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0B501F404 for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 17:18:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751883AbeCWRSj (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Mar 2018 13:18:39 -0400 Received: from mail-pl0-f65.google.com ([209.85.160.65]:38382 "EHLO mail-pl0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752152AbeCWRSb (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Mar 2018 13:18:31 -0400 Received: by mail-pl0-f65.google.com with SMTP id m22-v6so7827496pls.5 for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:18:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=O8GIqHpJARcoTLEnuJ7Jsb4bE4+2Rfo61KTUEbBnPps=; b=Q1IcIRU+2TgLvWa8+KGUAkKPfslc97QoCZZCd8qtsVQDxvW+flycmmjd6Og0C0GdfL qJ/OASRrMFI8tzoLkn8T4+/oEBuTTrVrHoKT1iUM3z1OsUzYKmycBz+bl3/DSV+KW5Ol IGOBT3P+3ninzV4/duwqTAY10efc7R2ckrZU6k5lBAKCYJXV2siliKek3sQiWXQgwtHb JWVYPxBW3I3IDZG2osoXqsaPDe0B0rLJEWOirRe536Q2oLWIcXUqDbJy/VIAQI/1J4t8 xFJoDMsshRICQUzfWzOZer6esvTITHYYrLELknA3xkYn9xsxPh1KBzGY8/+KbNv9irH8 Jzqg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=O8GIqHpJARcoTLEnuJ7Jsb4bE4+2Rfo61KTUEbBnPps=; b=JuHRzQtDLfTiSazIbTe5MR36Coue/5LgG+cvPwfzv/Td4nRnFUWDRIAM6olOfCzw+L 8dGHJ3HVHlH2VzOk5QpxwzVeioRVDfCyaTEMXoPlTEPzbaFn1G2p+0zlhyqZL1sAamju pceXyTunqr0Yc+C2IoR61wXdFO/Qqb5+8ME/yT6E+jkAkqwDQZksqlMFctgz1FPjF5Sh 2uo2sIbW/0vk2QXUZKOC9O1Hur0C8pCOIA9LdRU6ujA3VN/Ep5UmXTGZw1CxVGn9ipWH W6Y6wLuEYQihcTUlRWtN+pJUUfcjrjRzyV2E9XE45/GenTHhN85gaJDLQBbGjtlQW7/1 SZ4g== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7F5mUUNoLpgfh3tIbef62cNMCijkc/QGmJwYi/YWlr5W5tjFSTj uLkXjbJSDUfAvxhgdgZEol0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELsK2179SjSWu6bs6t9b4tor3OyZcF9xr/lG6ty15qu2SQeUGTkvLz1otqWtdubzAbro/UtTTQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:108a:: with SMTP id c10-v6mr25181038pla.22.1521825510305; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:18:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aiede.svl.corp.google.com ([2620:0:100e:422:4187:1d6c:d3d6:9ce6]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s89sm19997981pfk.54.2018.03.23.10.18.29 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:18:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:18:28 -0700 From: Jonathan Nieder To: git@jeffhostetler.com Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com, peff@peff.net, avarab@gmail.com, Jeff Hostetler Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] json_writer: new routines to create data in JSON format Message-ID: <20180323171828.GD179915@aiede.svl.corp.google.com> References: <20180323162952.81443-1-git@jeffhostetler.com> <20180323162952.81443-2-git@jeffhostetler.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180323162952.81443-2-git@jeffhostetler.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org git@jeffhostetler.com wrote: > From: Jeff Hostetler > > Add basic routines to generate data in JSON format. > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Hostetler If I understand the cover letter correctly, this is a JSON-like format, not actual JSON. Am I understanding correctly? What are the requirements for consuming this output? Will a typical JSON library be able to handle it without trouble? If not, is there some subset of cases where a typical JSON library is able to handle it without trouble? Can you say a little about the motivation here? (I know you already put some of that in the cover letter, but since that doesn't become part of permanent history, it doesn't help the audience that matters.) This would also be easier to review if there were an application of it in the same series. It's fine to send an RFC like this without such an application, but I think we should hold off on merging it until we have one. Having an application makes review much easier since we can see how the API works in practice, how well the approach fits what users need, etc. Thanks and hope that helps, Jonathan