On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 8:48 PM Gavin Lambert via Boost
While granted, "why not do it like X?" can be annoying when you did already consider that and found it didn't work for whatever reason
My esteemed colleague Darrell Wright enlightened me as to the meaning of the the aforementioned jargonspeaux. It wasn't a matter of "it didn't work" but rather, that there are several different flavors of JSON libraries which are mutually incompatible in terms of API: DOM, using user-types, in-situ (SIMDJSON) come to mind. The library I offered is the DOM variety. The other types are perfectly valid and useful, I just felt that I personally was both lacking in knowledge and insufficiently enthusiastic to also deliver the other flavors. There is still plenty of room in Boost for the type of JSON library that Niall describes, which is to go directly to and from user defined types and serialized JSON. I still assert that these different approaches to "implementing JSON" each belong in their own library - because optimizing for one case necessarily disadvantages the others. But the point I was trying to make originally had nothing to do with the particulars of the various JSON approaches. Rather, the point is that we must be ever-vigilant never to conflate vigorous and spirited technical debate with "personal retribution", because this false accusation dilutes the value and assaults the reputation of the review process. Thanks