On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Jason Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > tl;dr = Minor disagreement with Benoit but happy to go with his decision. > > On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Jason Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> well as a database, CouchDB shouldn't change the way data are saved >>>> in. I expect that the number I saved under the json type Number [1] >>>> defined by the spec [2] is correctly saved and returned as is. No >>>> roundtrip or precision lost should happen. >>> >>> Okay. "JSON type Number" is incoherent. JSON has only numerals, no >>> numbers. JavaScript standards are as relevant as FORTRAN standards. >>> But may we continue that discussion in JIRA? >>> >> I don't follow. JSON describes a number type, and refers to another >> iso standard too. How it's incoherent. > > I could be wrong but I don't see a reference to an ISO or similar > standard. I am reading RFC 4627. > The spec let me think that number should follow the ECMA-754 [1] . But i will double check.
Anyway for me a document is a data I post on the disc and it seems reasonable to get the same result when I want to get it back. If it's not a regression, it isn't really a blocker I think. But I think we should definitely fix it. - benoît [1] http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=4610935
