On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 2:58 AM Andrzej Krzemienski via Boost
My understanding of a "vocabulary type" is that it should be usable (not necessarily with maximum efficiency) for *any* usage. In the case of JSON
When I use the term I refer to the ability to build higher level abstractions. Here's a perfect example: https://github.com/arun11299/cpp-jwt This library implements RFC-7519 and uses objects of type nlohmann::json in its public interface. I argue that boost::json::value would be a superior type to what this library currently uses. That is what is meant when Boost.JSON claims to be a "vocabulary type." It certainly does not mean that arbitrary precision numbers are supported, that every possible use-case is supported, or that it can store any payload with perfect fidelity. Thanks