You've inspired me to improve my Unicode support. UTF-16 surrogates now
supported in cJSON.
Not much I can do with embedded null characters since I /do/ use char*...
but at least I skip them now. :)
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Milo Sredkov <miloslav@...> wrote:
> Hello, JSON Groups Members!
> As I already mentioned, I recently finished analysing some large
> number of JSON libraries linked from json.org about the data models
> (or meta-models, information models, etc.) they use or assume. These
> analyses are done for the needs of the evaluation part of a JSON data
> model paper I am currently working on, but I think that they may be
> useful for someone else to. Here is what I have done:
> * All 72 links from http://json.org/ in the sections C++, C, Java,
> picked these 10 languages because they are the most discussed ones
> according to http://langpop.com/ .
> * For each of these libraries, a quick analysis was performed based
> on its source code, documentation, unit-tests or actual hands-on
> experiments, in attempt to determine what information model is implied
> for JSON (most often, what the of parsing JSON is).
> * For each of these 72 libraries (minus 9, which were skipped) the
> information was summarised and reduced to several columns in the
> resulting table.
> Keep in mind that:
> * The result may contain errors because the libraries were analysed in
> about one hour on average only.
> * The data considers only the (actual or intended) data-model, i.e.
> how the JSON syntax is interpreted. It does not give any details about
> the quality of the implementations (which actually varied very
> dramatically), its usability, or even whether it works at all.
> So here is the link:
> If you find any problems in these entries, or have any comments please
> write me. I apologise in advance to the authors of the mentioned
> libraries if I have provided any incorrect information.
> Milo Sredkov
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]