Re: RFC: std.json sucessor

[via Digitalmars-d]

Btw, maybe it would be a good idea to take a look on the JSON 
that various browsers generates to see if there are any 
differences?

Then one could tune optimizations to what is the most common 
coding, like this:

1. start parsing assuming "browser style restricted JSON" grammar.

2. on failure jump to the slower "generic JSON"

Chrome does not seem to generate whitespace in JSON.stringfy(). 
And I would not be surprised if the encoding of double is similar 
across browsers.

Ola.