Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 10/18/2009 04:06 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
Integration with QObjects is a killer feature, I think it's the
stronger argument against grabbing one from the internet.
Yeah, I'd say let's go with Anthony's stuff. I'll rebase the encoder
on top of it soonish (I still think it's best if JSON encoding lies in
QObject like a kind of toString). If we'll need the asynchronous
parsing later, we can easily replace it with mine or Vincent's.
One thing I want to add as a feature to the 0.12 release is a nice
client API. To have this, we'll need message boundary identification
and a JSON encoder. I'll focus on the message boundary identification
today.
I'd strongly suggest making the JSON encoder live outside of QObject.
There are many possible ways to represent a QObject. Think of JSON as a
view of the QObject model. The human monitor mode representation is a
different view.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
Paolo
