7 ms·
We are also heavily using it since 3.x. Thank you! Any reasons for picking Cpanel::JSON::XS over JSON::XS? The latter has marginally better performance.
by petre 8y ago
We are also heavily using it since 3.x. Thank you!
Any reasons for picking Cpanel::JSON::XS over JSON::XS? The latter has marginally better performance.
- kraih 8y agoYes, Cpanel::JSON::XS can be configured to be closer to the original Mojo::JSON behaviour. And the maintainer has historically been more cooperative with efforts to make Perl JSON modules compatible with each other.
- xeeeeeeeeeeenu 8y ago>And the maintainer has historically been more cooperative with efforts to make Perl JSON modules compatible with each other. Indeed, MLEHMANN's (JSON::XS maintainer) difficult personality was one of the main reasons why Cpanel::JSON::XS was created and why it has gained so much popularity despite being almost identical functionally.
- rurban 8y agoI would rather point out that JSON::XS simply refused to fix its most important bugs, and rather blamed upstream. I simply fixed those bugs and kept maintaining it. I also added many new features, just streaming support not yet. The name is a bit unfortunate though as Cpanel itself still refuses to use it for political reasons. There is a high-profile jerk there running an agenda for his own personal profit. So I rather want to persuade Lehmann to give me his namespace and continue with it under the original name.
- Grinnz 8y agoThere is a long list of bug fixes and enhancements that have been made in the fork, many of which are critical in my opinion: https://metacpan.org/pod/Cpanel::JSON::XS#cPanel-fork https://metacpan.org/pod/Cpanel::JSON::XS#cPanel-fork