4 ms·
That sounds like a limitation of the implementation. Decimal types exist. If the implementation wants to account for some floating point errors I think that's
by 8n4vidtmkvmk 4y ago
That sounds like a limitation of the implementation. Decimal types exist.
If the implementation wants to account for some floating point errors I think that's fine too. If they want to codify it though, maybe add an epsilon param so the user can specify how close they want it to be.
- throwawaymaths 4y agoDecimal types don't exist in JSON. If you need decimals, you definitely should encode them as strings. As JSONschema exists to document JSON, it should be agnostic to that. You can if you wish, provide format information in the format field, which is not prescriptive.
- planede 4y agoNeither binary nor decimal floating point types exist in the JSON spec. The JSON spec does not give an explicit internal representation for floating points, implementations are free to use decimal types internally, if they wish to do so. The JSON spec merely specifies what a "number" is at the grammar level. Having said that most implementations don't use decimal floating points to represent these.
- jjgreen 4y agoIt is a scandal that JSON does not support the BigInt type.
- throwawaymaths 4y agoIt does. Just string encode it.
- jjgreen 4y ago1 == "1"; // true 1n == "1"; // true 1n == "1n"; // false
- throwawaymaths 4y agoYou have to describe what your encoding is in the "format" field of your JSONschema and implement the correct semantic meaning.
- awwright 4y agoIt does. In fact, not only does JSON support big ints, but it supports arbitrary-precision base-10 decimal numbers. Whether your JSON parser will preserve the precision correctly is another story. For JavaScript/ECMAScript, you'll need to use a library.
- throwawaymaths 4y agoThat is correct, but JSONschema does and there is an implicit behavioural difference introduced by the existence of the MultipleOf filter when you're dealing with floats versus integers that can't simply be elided away or excused by the lack of a distinction in the underlying type system. The point is JSONschema could take a stand and say for example, "this filter will always fail when the operand is not the number representation of an exact integer".
- awwright 4y agoThis is wrong. All numbers in JSON are arbitrary-precision base-10 decimal numbers.
- throwawaymaths 4y agoNo they aren't. The JSON spec says implementation is up to the engine and de facto JSON numbers are parsed as ieee754 on just about every platform I can think of.