users@jsonb-spec.java.net

[jsonb-spec users] [jsr367-experts] Re: [2-DefaultMapping] Proposal

From: Inderjeet Singh <inder_at_alumni.stanford.edu>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 10:43:53 -0700

I think fromJson(File) is unnecessary and should be removed.
Even fromJson(InputStream) is supect, but I guess InputStreams are still
all too common.

toJson(..., Appendable appendable) should be better than Writer().
Get rid of toJson(..., writer), toJson(..., File) and toJson(...,
OutputStream)

A powerful (and very useful) feature of Gson is custom type adapters. How
will that be done in Jsonb.

Inder





On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Eugen Cepoi <cepoi.eugen_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey Martins,
>
> Quick feedback on the API.
>
> I don't like much the to/from in JsonbConfig. At least for the formatting
> it is obvious that it exists only during serialization.
> Not sure ConfigException is needed, I mean sure in some case we could
> throw this exception, but in practice maybe no one will. Also in multiple
> places I see IllegalArgumentEx, and it makes sense, we could same way use
> other existing exceptions - instead of ConfigEx.
>
> getProperty could return an Optional and throw an exception only if the
> arg is null.
>
> We could also add an option to skip null during serialization in the
> config.
>
> In JsonbBuilder, the newBuilder related to JsonbProvider are a bit
> redundant as we also have similar method inside the provider. But from
> another side, it provides a single entry point - this is good. This makes
> the API more easy to use.
>
> I didn't read the javadoc carefully.
>
> About the examples... well they are just examples :)
>
> Eugen
>
>
> 2015-03-12 16:46 GMT+01:00 Martin Grebac <martin.grebac_at_oracle.com>:
>
>> Just would like to explicitly point to the spec document itself in this
>> branch:
>>
>> https://java.net/projects/jsonb-spec/sources/git/
>> content/spec/spec.pdf?rev=da7db533076856699cec49a4eebd300b9f4a7230
>>
>> MartiNG
>>
>>
>> On 12.03.15 16:35, Martin Vojtek wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Experts,
>>>
>>> there has been a lot of changes recently in default_mapping. This
>>> completes the second iteration of default mapping proposal.
>>>
>>> Generics and integration with JSON Processing is not part of this
>>> discussion.
>>>
>>> Please take a look and feel free to express your point of view.
>>>
>>> https://github.com/json-binding/spec/tree/default_mapping
>>>
>>> Looking forward to your feedback.
>>>
>>> MartinV
>>>
>>
>>
>