Re: JSON for PG 9.2

From: Claes Jakobsson <claes(at)surfar(dot)nu>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
Cc: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Jan Urbański <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Joey Adams <joeyadams3(dot)14159(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Subject: Re: JSON for PG 9.2
Date: 2011-12-20 18:39:54
Message-ID: D1B8E142-2A38-4B02-A021-CA08D13BE78E@surfar.nu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Dec 20, 2011, at 12:39 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Dec 19, 2011, at 2:49 AM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
>
>> My understanding is that JSON is a subset of ECMAscript
>
> Well, no, JSON is formally “a lightweight data-interchange format.” It’s derived from JavaScript syntax, but it is not a programming language, so I wouldn’t say it was accurate to describe it as a subset of JS or ECMAScript.
>
> http://json.org/

Are people explicitly asking for a) *JSON* datatype or b) a type that lets you store arbitrary complex semi-untyped data structures?

if b) then this might get a lot more interesting

Cheers,
Claes

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jesper Krogh 2011-12-20 18:44:53 Re: Page Checksums
Previous Message Jesper Krogh 2011-12-20 18:39:53 Re: Page Checksums