Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

1062Re: [json] Re: JSON syntax grammar is missing 'undefined' literal value

Expand Messages
  • Tatu Saloranta
    May 27, 2008
      On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:19 AM, Greg Patnude <gpatnude@...> wrote:
      ...
      > Most modern programming languages HAVE defined "undefined" --
      > Undefined is NOT 0 and NOT 1, and NOT 'null' AND NOT 'not null', and
      > NOT true and NOT false... Bottom line: undefined is actually defined
      > as something that is NOT DEFINED...

      I don't think it's true for most (modern) programming languages;
      although it may be true for most _scripting_ languages. This is
      different from, say, null, which has a counterpart in about any
      language including c and c++ (unlike someone claimed earlier).

      > As far as JSON goes -- by definition: it is "JavaScript Object
      > Notation" -- so -- on the technical definition -- JSON is in fact a
      > "JavaScript-ONLY" object notation mechanism. The great thing about

      Not really: you can not derive semantics from etymology. Names are
      just names and like you mention, they can lead to intuitive yet
      incorrect guesses.

      To understand goals, one could consult the author... and Doug has
      already pointed out his view on the matter.

      Additionally reading the JSON RFC, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4627.txt
      one can find:

      "JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) is a lightweight, text-based,
      language-independent data interchange format"

      Nowhere does it say anything about coupling with Javascript.
      My understanding is that just JS syntax was used. In a funny way makes
      sense: JavaScript has little to do with Java, beyond syntax; and
      similarly JSON just took syntax from Javascript (or, from Java, if you
      will).

      Apologies for prolonging this flogging of a dead horse,

      -+ Tatu +-
    • Show all 19 messages in this topic