On 2018-03-18 21:06, Mike Samuel wrote:
On Sun, Mar 18, 2018, 4:00 PM Anders Rundgren <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 2018-03-18 20:23, Mike Samuel wrote:
> It is possible that I don't understand what you are asking for here
since I have no experience with toJSON.
>
> Based on this documentation
>
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/JSON/stringify
<https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/JSON/stringify>
> JSON.canonicalize() would though work out of the box (when
integrated in the JSON object NB...) since it would inherit all the functionality
(and 99% of the code) of JSON.stringify()
>
>
> JSON.stringify(new Date()) has specific semantics because
Date.prototype.toJSON has specific semantics.
> As currently written, JSON.canonicalize(new Date()) ===
JSON.canonicalize({})
It seems that you (deliberately?) misunderstand what I'm writing above.
JSON.canonicalize(new Date()) would do exactly the same thing as
JSON.stringify(new Date()) since it apparently only returns a string.
Where in the spec do you handle this case?
It doesn't, it only describes a canonicalization algorithm.
Integration of the canonicalization algorithm in the ES JSON object might cost
as much a 5 lines of code + some refactoring.
Anders
Again, the sample code I provided is a bare bones solution with the only
purpose showing the proposed canonicalization algorithm in code as a complement
to the written specification.
Understood. AFAICT neither the text nor the instructional code treat Dates
differently from an empty object.
Anders
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
