On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 5:31 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > It would be great if we could have one API that is shared by the client > and the server, but the ideal client side library would permit the > various subtypes to be nothing more than overlay types. I don't really > like the current GWT JSON module, it was designed prior to overlay > types. > > A overlay type version would be better, but you have to be careful about > the fact that 'instanceof' won't work, you can use boolean checks, or > you could add something more akin to the DOM Node.getNodeType() which > returns an enumeration. >
I always took the GWT JSON library as what you did when you had variable JSON being returned and couldn't define the fields at compile-time. If you can use JSOs, you don't use this library at all, just have a static factory method on the JSO to parse the JSON string. > Could we perhaps extract some shared interface and make it shared, but > leave the current implementation in c.g.g.dev.json (or in c.g.g.server?) > That would allow a future c.g.g.user.json version to exist. > If you are using JSOs, why do you need anything more than a compatibility wrapper (to fallback to eval) around JSON.parse than returns JSO? -- John A. Tamplin Software Engineer (GWT), Google -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
