Jason's point, I believe, is that there is no distinction between types of numbers in JSON.
It's an easy tweak to the encoder to make ejson:decode(ejson:encode(1.0)) =:= 1.0, though. I'd like to hear arguments for and against before we fire up round 2. B. On 11 February 2012 18:33, Dirkjan Ochtman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 16:25, Jason Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> I suggested it was not a bug. One might argue that Couch should echo >> back exactly what you give it. I can see that point but am not >> persuaded. The bug is Python's deserializer being too clever. Since >> Python is widespread, it is a maybe a breaking change, but not a >> blocker. > > I'm pretty sure I ran into this problem once and checked that CouchDB > did what I felt was right (i.e. preserve number type). I think I even > asked about it on the IRC channel where it was also asserted that > CouchDB did this correctly. It would be a pretty big pain if this > changed. > > Cheers, > > Dirkjan
