W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: [XHR] responseType "json"

From: Jarred Nicholls <jarred@sencha.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 08:14:13 -0500
Message-ID: <CANufG2PKf_qsRq60EnvqZxfm+Rqf8orR7rJTdxxJcm5KuEREwA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 6:39 AM, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Jarred Nicholls <jarred@sencha.com>
> wrote:
> >  A good compromise would be to only throw it away (and thus restrict
> > responseText access) upon the first successful parse when accessing
> > .response.
>
> I disagree. Even though conceptually, the spec says that you first
> accumulate text and then you invoke JSON.parse, I think we should
> allow for implementations that feed an incremental JSON parser as data
> arrives from the network and throws away each input buffer after
> pushing it to the incremental JSON parser.
>
> That is, in order to allow more memory-efficient implementations in
> the future, I think we shouldn't expose responseText for JSON.
>

I'm completely down with that.  It still leaves an unsatisfied use case;
but one that, after a nice weekend of relaxation, I no longer care about.


>
> --
> Henri Sivonen
> hsivonen@iki.fi
> http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
>
>


-- 
................................................................

*Sencha*
Jarred Nicholls, Senior Software Architect
@jarrednicholls
<http://twitter.com/jarrednicholls>
Received on Monday, 12 December 2011 13:15:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:49 GMT