Re: [review][JSON] json::value as a vocabulary type

From: Hadriel Kaplan (hadrielk_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-09-26 22:09:36

> On Sep 26, 2020, at 2:44 PM, Rainer Deyke via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 
> On 25.09.20 17:23, Hadriel Kaplan via Boost wrote:
>> Empirical evidence would suggest otherwise. nlohmann, RapidJson, folly::dynamic, etc. do not support that. How can it *need* to support it, when other popular and useful libraries haven’t?
> 
> Actually AFAIK nlohmann does support arbitrary numbers, since all representation types are template arguments to basic_json.  There's nothing to stop you from passing a BigInt type as NumberIntegerType.
> 

Yeah, fair point. But then that would be your new one-and-only signed integer type. I’m not sure that’s really the same idea as what’s being asked for.(?) I mean that’s going to make using it as a cross-library API value-type fairly painful, no?

One could also just make a new `boost::json::kind` of `any`, and implement something similar to `std::any` to be held as one of the variant types. (and thereby avoid templating everything in boost::json)

-hadriel