On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Georg Ragaller <[email protected]> wrote:
> I guess this is the best way not only because of being compatible > with the old format, but with JSON itself. > > Since the 'J' stands for JavaScript and JavaScript has only one > number type, which is a 64-bit floating point number. > So to be a good JSON citizen only fp-numbers should be written > as literals. Interesting, but the JSON package being used will deserialize to a variety of formats in Java. And that led to mixed collections if the numbers varied in size. I'll take a closer look at the spec (if one exists) and perhaps also look at another implementation... Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug _______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
