Storing instances using jsonpickle

MRAB python at mrabarnett.plus.com
Fri Sep 5 19:04:11 CEST 2014


On 2014-09-04 06:17, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:39 AM, MRAB <python at mrabarnett.plus.com> wrote:
>> I occasionally think about a superset of JSON, called, say, "pyson" ...
>> ah, name already taken! :-(
>
> While I'm somewhat sympathetic to the concept, there are some parts of
> your description that I disagree with. Am I misreading something? Are
> there typos in the description and I'm making something out of
> nothing?
>
>> It would add tuples, delimited by (...), which are not used otherwise (no
>> expressions):
>>
>>     () => ()
>>     (0, ) => (0)
>
> This seems odd. Part of JSON's convenience is that it's a subset of
> JavaScript syntax, so you can just plop a block of JSON into a REPL
> and it'll decode correctly. With PyON (or whatever you call it), it'd
> be nice to have the same correspondence; for a start, I would strongly
> encourage the "trailing comma is permitted" rule (so [1,2,3,] is
> equivalent to [1,2,3]), and then I'd have the default encoding for a
> single-element tuple include that trailing comma. If (0) is a
> one-element tuple, you end up with a subtle difference between a PyON
> decode and the Python interpreter, which is likely to cause problems.
> It might even be worth actually mandating (not just encouraging) that
> one-element tuples have the trailing comma, just to prevent that.
>
[snip]

JSON has 'true' and 'false'.

Python has 'True' and 'False'.

Therefore, if you want it to be able to drop it into Python's REPL, it
won't be compatible with JSON anyway! (Well, not unless you define
'true' and 'false' first.)




More information about the Python-list mailing list