On 9/23/20 1:55 PM, Niall Douglas via Boost wrote:
Consider this: a Hana Dusíková type all-constexpr JSON parser could let you specify to the compiler at compile time "this is the exact structure of the JSON that shall be parsed". The compiler then bangs out optimum parse code for that specific JSON structure input. At runtime, the parser tries the pregenerated canned parsers first, if none match, then it falls back to runtime parsing. Given that much JSON is just a long sequence of identical structure records, this would be a very compelling new C++ JSON parsing library, a whole new better way of doing parsing. *That* I would get excited about.
Great. There's really quite a lot of things to imagine about future C++ and libraries to be written in future C++ that get me excited. There are also things about C++ that really don't excite me and probably most other people as well. To name a few examples: std::vector, std::string, etc. They are not perfect, they are not fancy, they are not even pretty. But they are useful. Almost every day. To many, if not most C++ developers. And they perform well. In many ordinary use-cases. That's where I could see Boost Json: It's not perfect and probably also not pretty in parser-aesthetic terms (judging from some the review comments). But for me it combines a simple and widely-used user interface (similar to nlohmann's) with decent performance (similar to rapidjson). That gives me 90% of both worlds. And I get it now / soon. As a user of Json libraries, I find this a worthwhile trade-off. Max
Niall
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost