2013/4/5 Aleix Conchillo Flaqué <[email protected]> > Thank you both for the comments. > > I must admit that I got kind of lost and I ended up not knowing if you > had any specific suggestions for guile-json. It is my very first guile > (scheme) package and I am pretty new to scheme. > > From what I understood, the main concerns were: > > 1. Hash tables might not be a proper way to represent JSON objects. > > 2. Syntax for accessing JSON objects. > > For 1, as Taylan mentioned, json.org clearly says that JSON objects > are unordered. So I thought a hash table was the right data structure > to use. I initially thought about using association lists, but that's > ordered and performance might be worst for large objects. >
Yes, so as it turns out, it was my ignorance that caused me to raise this topic :) Hash tables are fine, but I think that guile's support for them isn't convinient, because their print representation isn't very informative (which occured to me when I was trying to test how exactly guile-json works) > May be it would be better to have a json-object type and procedures to > access it (json-object-ref ...) and internally it could be a hash > table, or an alist. Then, maybe, the user could specify if he wants to > get ordered json-objects or not, and internally use hash tables or > alists. > I think that, if the specification says that it's unordered, there's no actual need to complicate things overly :) > For 2, yes, a better syntax would be ideal. I don't know about > SRFI-105, but I'll take a look into it. > > SRFI-105 offers only infix/m-exp notation within curly braces and a more decent way to index arrays (using postfix brackets, as in most popular programming languages) Sorry if I caused unnecessary confusion ;o Best regards M.
