Re: [review] [json] My JSON review

From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-09-21 16:01:23

On 21/09/2020 16:25, Mathias Gaunard via Boost wrote:

>> That is by design. Boost.JSON is not a serialization library. It
>> addresses the use case for a JSON DOM with accompanying parser and
>> serializer. This is not an insignificant use-case; witness the
>> popularity of RapidJSON and nlohmann's JSON for Modern C++. In fact
>> didn't you say you are already using RapidJSON?
> 
> I use RapidJSON because it's the established industry standard to do
> precisely what this library does.

For me RapidJSON is a legacy design useful only for legacy codebases.
sajson and simdjson are the current state of the art for new C++ code.
If you don't mind modifying the JSON being parsed (i.e. it's a mutable
buffer and you will throw away the JSON afterwards in any case),
refactoring around sajson's in-JSON AST generation delivers very
sizeable performance gains.

> As I said I don't believe the value proposition of this library is
> sufficient to replace existing things when all it does is the same
> thing but with a Boost logo on it. There is no guarantee at this stage
> this library will get any traction or maintenance on the same level as
> one which is used by thousands of projects, so it's not worth the risk
> to me.

Boost has a long history of duplicating something already widely used in
the C++ ecosystem, but "Boostified" so it has STL naming and design
patterns.

And that's fine by me. People who like a standard C++ API design over
other considerations will choose the Boost duplicate.

Niall