4 ms·
Or implement the specification instead of just skimming it. As far as I remember they skipped several safeguards that would have prevented this problem when the
by josefx 5y ago
Or implement the specification instead of just skimming it. As far as I remember they skipped several safeguards that would have prevented this problem when they implemented the compression algorithm.
- DonHopkins 5y agoYah, I've used some lame-assed JSON parsers whose authors thought they knew it well enough in their head that they didn't bother looking at the nice spec that laid it all out for them in black and while.
- megous 5y agoOriginally, many years ago, JSON didn't have a complete and unambiguous spec. It was just some webpage on some random website.
- kragen 5y agoMaybe you mean http://web.archive.org/web/20030228034147/http://www.crockford.com/JSON/index.html http://web.archive.org/web/20030228034147/http://www.crockfo...? That has a context-free grammar (which omits the syntax for literals), railroad diagrams (which includes it), a prose description, an example JSON document, and a public-domain sample implementation in Java. It's true that there are some holes in the spec, notably the definition of whitespace and the semantics, but it's fairly complete and unambiguous.
- megous 5y agoHmm, pretty good actually.