On Thursday, 14 June 2018 06:47:56 PDT Jean-Michaël Celerier wrote: > > So YAML makes a lot of sense. > > https://github.com/yaml/YAML2/wiki/People-Raging-About-YAML > https://users.rust-lang.org/t/why-does-cargo-use-toml/3577/15 > > I would like to understand what all this discussion is about. What is the > goal for Qt ? > > a) allow developers using Qt to have a simple, human-readable (that's the > n°1 feature my users always asked about save and file formats) and easy to > write serialization method ? > b) compatibility with existing formats, e.g. I want to communicate with a > webservice which speaks JSON or whatever > c) maximum performance for e.g. message passing between two processes ?
THIS discussion is none of those. This discussion is about the API we want to have for Qt for at least JSON and CBOR. We may want to add more formats and the one that comes to mind as the lowest hanging fruit is YAML. You brought up TOML, which in turn brings to mind: should we merge with QSettings too? > In any case, what would be the added value of Qt providing new > serialization formats & APIs, especially wrt exisiting header-only > libraries (rapidjson, nlohmann/json for instance in the json world) which > provide better performance AND compliance than Qt's ? (again, for json, > https://github.com/miloyip/nativejson-benchmark) That is not the discussion, but let me answer: people expect to have an API. >From the 41 libraries that were listed in there, can you list which ones support QString? -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
