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

Java JSON

Expand Messages
  • Douglas Crockford
    The JSON.org page currently lists 21 packages for Java. Will the Java community ever converge on one as some other language communities are doing?
    Message 1 of 8 , Jan 24, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      The JSON.org page currently lists 21 packages for Java. Will the Java community ever converge on one as some other language communities are doing?
    • John Cowan
      ... I would say that that could happen in only a few ways: 1) If someone shepherded a particular library through the JCP, a clunky and bureaucratic process
      Message 2 of 8 , Jan 24, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Douglas Crockford scripsit:

        > The JSON.org page currently lists 21 packages for Java. Will the Java
        > community ever converge on one as some other language communities
        > are doing?

        I would say that that could happen in only a few ways:

        1) If someone shepherded a particular library through the JCP, a clunky and
        bureaucratic process whose future is much doubted

        2) If you as JSON BDFL pushed one of them.

        Also, google-gson is not just a plain JSON library, and jsonix is actually
        a JavaScript, not a Java library. There are probably other such errors.

        --
        John Cowan cowan@... http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
        Most languages are dramatically underdescribed, and at least one is
        dramatically overdescribed. Still other languages are simultaneously
        overdescribed and underdescribed. Welsh pertains to the third category.
        --Alan King
      • Tatu Saloranta
        On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Douglas Crockford ... Probably not to the degree that there d be just one. From the list I think just maybe half a dozen are
        Message 3 of 8 , Jan 24, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Douglas Crockford
          <douglas@...> wrote:
          > The JSON.org page currently lists 21 packages for Java. Will the Java community ever converge on one as some other language communities are doing?

          Probably not to the degree that there'd be just one. From the list I
          think just maybe half a dozen are widely used for whatever that's
          worth.
          I think there is some actual convergence, especially in cases where
          new projects choose from existing libraries. In JAX-RS (Jersey,
          RESTeasy) space, for example, number of libraries that are supported
          out of box is quite low, and tends to follow similar trajectory (start
          with library that emulates xml processing, Jettison, or the reference
          implementation; move on to lib(s) that do full data binding like
          Jackson or json-lib).
          I think authors of frameworks have more time and interest in doing due
          diligence to figure out best components to use, which then limits
          candidates that offer best set of features and support. And over time
          users of frameworks seem to gravitate towards those libraries even
          when developing stand-alone system.

          One thing that irritates me is not so much number of alternatives but
          the fact that most new candidates make bold claims but seem to offer
          very little that is better or even different (in positive sense) from
          existing choices.

          -+ Tatu +-
        • Dennis Gearon
          If there was anything that bugs ME, is incomplete documentation and just read the code type of libraries. Dennis Gearon ________________________________
          Message 4 of 8 , Jan 24, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            If there was anything that bugs ME, is incomplete documentation and 'just read
            the code' type of libraries.

            Dennis Gearon





            ________________________________
            From: Tatu Saloranta <tsaloranta@...>
            To: json@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Mon, January 24, 2011 1:18:43 PM
            Subject: Re: [json] Java JSON


            On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Douglas Crockford
            <douglas@...> wrote:
            > The JSON.org page currently lists 21 packages for Java. Will the Java community
            >ever converge on one as some other language communities are doing?

            Probably not to the degree that there'd be just one. From the list I
            think just maybe half a dozen are widely used for whatever that's
            worth.
            I think there is some actual convergence, especially in cases where
            new projects choose from existing libraries. In JAX-RS (Jersey,
            RESTeasy) space, for example, number of libraries that are supported
            out of box is quite low, and tends to follow similar trajectory (start
            with library that emulates xml processing, Jettison, or the reference
            implementation; move on to lib(s) that do full data binding like
            Jackson or json-lib).
            I think authors of frameworks have more time and interest in doing due
            diligence to figure out best components to use, which then limits
            candidates that offer best set of features and support. And over time
            users of frameworks seem to gravitate towards those libraries even
            when developing stand-alone system.

            One thing that irritates me is not so much number of alternatives but
            the fact that most new candidates make bold claims but seem to offer
            very little that is better or even different (in positive sense) from
            existing choices.

            -+ Tatu +-



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • John Cowan
            ... +1000 -- One Word to write them all, John Cowan One Access to find them, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan One Excel to
            Message 5 of 8 , Jan 24, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              Dennis Gearon scripsit:

              > If there was anything that bugs ME, is incomplete documentation and 'just read
              > the code' type of libraries.

              +1000

              --
              One Word to write them all, John Cowan <cowan@...>
              One Access to find them, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
              One Excel to count them all,
              And thus to Windows bind them. --Mike Champion
            • Tatu Saloranta
              ... True. That also contributes to feeling of but how is this different . Maybe there are strengths, but if finding those requires reading sources, yeah,
              Message 6 of 8 , Jan 24, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Dennis Gearon <gearond@...> wrote:
                > If there was anything that bugs ME, is incomplete documentation and 'just read
                > the code' type of libraries.

                True. That also contributes to feeling of "but how is this different".
                Maybe there are strengths, but if finding those requires reading
                sources, yeah, that's lots to ask.

                And it's also easier to accumulate documentation when projects grow;
                and having small number of leading libs helps the snowball effect.

                -+ Tatu +-
              • Dennis Gearon
                I m working on documenting my own API (JSON, JSON-RPCish), and it s a lot of work. I just keep reminding myself how I d like to read it. Dennis Gearon
                Message 7 of 8 , Jan 24, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  I'm working on documenting my own API (JSON, JSON-RPCish), and it's a lot of
                  work. I just keep reminding myself how I'd like to read it.



                  Dennis Gearon


                  Signature Warning
                  ----------------
                  It is always a good idea to learn from your own mistakes. It is usually a better
                  idea to learn from others’ mistakes, so you do not have to make them yourself.
                  from 'http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=4501&tag=nl.e036'


                  EARTH has a Right To Life,
                  otherwise we all die.




                  ________________________________
                  From: Tatu Saloranta <tsaloranta@...>
                  To: json@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Mon, January 24, 2011 3:39:02 PM
                  Subject: Re: [json] Java JSON


                  On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Dennis Gearon <gearond@...> wrote:
                  > If there was anything that bugs ME, is incomplete documentation and 'just read
                  > the code' type of libraries.

                  True. That also contributes to feeling of "but how is this different".
                  Maybe there are strengths, but if finding those requires reading
                  sources, yeah, that's lots to ask.

                  And it's also easier to accumulate documentation when projects grow;
                  and having small number of leading libs helps the snowball effect.

                  -+ Tatu +-



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • codeWarrior
                  ... Hopefully not... software is software... there s always more than one way to skin the proverbial cat... there can be only one is reminiscent of
                  Message 8 of 8 , Jan 26, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > The JSON.org page currently lists 21 packages for Java. Will the Java community ever converge on one as some other language communities are doing?
                    >

                    Hopefully not... software is software... there's always more than one way to skin the proverbial cat...

                    "there can be only one" is reminiscent of MicroSloth... As a developer, I require options...
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.