Shading Antlr or another parser, generated or in a library, is out of bounds IMO. Writing our own JSON parser is not a good idea either, it's not something a logging library should be in the business of maintaining, IMO again. It just feels to me like you just want jam your new module in core at any cost. I just don't see the need for that.
Gary On Wed, Mar 4, 2020, 11:03 Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > > > On Mar 4, 2020, at 1:23 AM, Volkan Yazıcı <volkan.yaz...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > I have managed to produce JSON in JsonTemplateLayout without using > > Jackson. I have successfully implemented all existing features with > > the exception of pretty printing, which I will leave out. There is a > > 2nd use case for Jackson in JsonTemplateLayout: reading the JSON > > schema. That is, JsonTemplateLayout uses Jackson both to parse the > > template and to render JSON. The former still needs to be addressed, > > i.e., I need a JSON parser. In order to qualify for "core", that needs > > to be accomplished without any dependencies. I thought of using ANTLR > > for parsing JSON, but that auto-generates Java sources depending on > > antlr4-runtime. May I shade+relocate antlr4-runtime? Do you have any > > suggestions on how to implement a dependency-free JSON parser? > > Not really. I am not sure avoiding the use of a JSON parser library just > to include the JsonTemplateLayout in core is worth the effort. People who > want to use JSON aren’t going to mind bringing in a JSON library. And if it > means adding a JSON parser to core that we have to maintain, unless it is > just a couple of classes I don’t know that I would want to do that. > > Ralph > > >
