Le dimanche 24 novembre 2019 à 07:39 -0800, Vinnie Falco a écrit :
* QtJsonValue is part of a huge application framework. This alone is enough to make it unsuitable as a vocabulary type: No one is writing libraries that depend on Qt (imagine a Boost library being proposed that required Qt).
While the last part of the sentence is true in the sense that it is really unlikely to happen (and thus we need a boost::jsonvalue), the first is obviously completely wrong. See https://github.com/fargies/qjsonrpc as a counter example.
Counterexample:
< https://github.com/ripple/rippled/blob/232975bfdbde12a65499130d78f938f261c98...
Seems i did not express myself correctly. What i wanted to say is that i don't want to use a json type in the core part (the “business logic”) of a program. Obviously i'll use one in any serialization adapter / rpc part (which is the case in your example) if needed. Although i still hope that a solution giving the same level of abstraction than .net core, where you expose standard types, and the framework takes care of all the serialization / deserialization part, is doable in pure c++ (made some experiments there back in time, was fun but very hard to maintain and very limited in functionalities). Regards, Julien