From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-09-23 10:05:09
Hans Dembinski wrote:
> You said yourself that Boost.JSON is not as efficient as it could be
> during the conversion of "my data type" to JSON, because the existing data
> has to be copied into the json::value first. I am a young member of the
> Boost family, but my feeling is that this would have been a reason to
> reject the design in the past.
I don't think so. As a previous reviewer correctly observed, an apple has
been submitted, and you're complaining that it isn't an orange.
Were it a bad apple, that would have been a reason to reject. If we didn't
need apples, if users didn't need apples, if the two most popular fruits
weren't apples, that might have been a reason to reject. Not being an orange
One possible objection (that has been used in the past) is that if we accept
an apple, nobody will submit an orange anymore. That's where the calendar
argument comes in. It's 2020, we didn't have an apple, and nobody has
submitted an orange. Ten years should have been enough time for orange
proponents. And this has nothing to do with "urgency".
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk