Re: [review][JSON] Some thoughts on recent reviews

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-09-21 20:01:58

On 9/21/20 11:46 AM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:

> 
> I find it interesting that people are coming out of the woodwork who claim
> to have written their own JSON libraries, that say REJECT to Boost.JSON,
> because they feel that conversion between JSON and user-defined types is of
> the utmost importance and that Boost can't have a JSON library without it.
> 

> * If this is so important, why does Boost.Serialization not have it?

Good question.  FYI - no one has EVER requested or even inquired about 
this.  I don't think it would be very hard (the xml_archive is hard). 
Maybe everyone who felt the needed it just made there own.  It's also 
possible that no one uses the serialization library anymore.  I would 
have no way of knowing if that were the case. FWIW I'm hoping this year 
to do a re-boot of the serialization documentation.  The main focus is 
to convert it from raw html to boost.book.  But also I want to add more 
examples: using it for "deep copy", using co-routines to convert from 
one serialization format to another, layering other boost libraries like 
encryption and compression, generating "editable" archives, etc.  None 
of these will alter the library itself - just provide more examples.

I have always been puzzled why no one has ever asked for any of these 
things.

> * Why is no one submitting a pull request to Boost.Serialization for a JSON
> archive?

ditto

> * Why has no one proposed a library to Boost which implements JSON
> Serialization?
> * Why doesn't Boost.PropertyTree have JSON-DOM but no JSON Serialization?
> * Where are the immensely popular JSON Serialization libraries?

ditto

Robert Ramey