Re: Json -> bean -> json

[Kevin Brown <et...@google.com>]

It looks fine to me, though I've never tried it first hand. As long as it
supports primitives, collections, simple objects, and comments in serialized
data it's OK.

However, I really don't want a third json library to depend on, either.

Hiding the implementation behind some interfaces would probably be a
prerequisite before we go plugging in yet another json library.

On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 4:34 AM, Ian Boston <ie...@tfd.co.uk> wrote:

> One of the guys on another project found this, which appears to support
> limited serialization of generic types.
>
> http://code.google.com/p/google-gson/
>
> Although I did a net.sf serialize for json,..... should we be using this ?
> At first glance it looks cleaner that json net sf to me, its AL2.
>
> Ian
>

Re: Json -> bean -> json

[Kevin Brown <et...@google.com>]

On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Ian Boston <ie...@tfd.co.uk> wrote:

> I was thinking that it might be a replacement for the net.sf version, I
> notice its (c) Google, so I am wondering if its a library known to you ?


It's the first I've personally heard of it.


>
> Ian
>
>
> On 1 Sep 2008, at 18:26, Kevin Brown wrote:
>
>  It looks fine to me, though I've never tried it first hand. As long as it
>> supports primitives, collections, simple objects, and comments in
>> serialized
>> data it's OK.
>>
>> However, I really don't want a third json library to depend on, either.
>>
>> Hiding the implementation behind some interfaces would probably be a
>> prerequisite before we go plugging in yet another json library.
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 4:34 AM, Ian Boston <ie...@tfd.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>  One of the guys on another project found this, which appears to support
>>> limited serialization of generic types.
>>>
>>> http://code.google.com/p/google-gson/
>>>
>>> Although I did a net.sf serialize for json,..... should we be using this
>>> ?
>>> At first glance it looks cleaner that json net sf to me, its AL2.
>>>
>>> Ian
>>>
>>>
>

Re: Json -> bean -> json

[Ian Boston <ie...@tfd.co.uk>]

I was thinking that it might be a replacement for the net.sf version,  
I notice its (c) Google, so I am wondering if its a library known to  
you ?
Ian

On 1 Sep 2008, at 18:26, Kevin Brown wrote:

> It looks fine to me, though I've never tried it first hand. As long  
> as it
> supports primitives, collections, simple objects, and comments in  
> serialized
> data it's OK.
>
> However, I really don't want a third json library to depend on,  
> either.
>
> Hiding the implementation behind some interfaces would probably be a
> prerequisite before we go plugging in yet another json library.
>
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 4:34 AM, Ian Boston <ie...@tfd.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> One of the guys on another project found this, which appears to  
>> support
>> limited serialization of generic types.
>>
>> http://code.google.com/p/google-gson/
>>
>> Although I did a net.sf serialize for json,..... should we be  
>> using this ?
>> At first glance it looks cleaner that json net sf to me, its AL2.
>>
>> Ian
>>