On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 6:25 AM, Marsh Ray <marsh@extendedsubset.com> wrote:
On 11/28/2010 02:21 PM, Hal Finkel wrote:
Regardless, even parse_config_file will often be more appropriate than using an embedded scripting language.
What I would really like is a clean and simple JSON library.
At the risk of sounding PR'ish...
Last time I looked around (a year or two ago) it seemed like there were a lot of 50-80% side projects, none of which gave me the warm fuzzies about being tested and maintained. Many would parse but not generate, or vice versa. The DOM v SAX architectural decisions seem relevant too.
It's actually on the list of things for me to do on cpp-netlib for 0.9 -- I'm working on cleaning up the internals of the library, and then preparing to do higher level utilities that will make web application or web service (REST+JSON) development with C++ easier. One of the things that I will be working on is a simple, robust, and type-safe way for doing JSON parsing/generation using Boost.Spirit. I'm positive there's already an example of how to do it with Boost.Spirit's Qi/Karma and I'm almost sure that I'll start with those. The idea with the utility library is that it will be usable in many different contexts -- and I'm actually prioritizing the parsing of HTTP requests that have JSON payload in PUT/POST requests. Of course that's just work waiting to be done -- if you have specific use cases in mind aside from just (simple) configuration file parsing, I'd definitely appreciate guidance/thoughts on what you would look for in a JSON parsing/generation library. HTH -- Dean Michael Berris deanberris.com