3 ms·
> If this article is correct, Apple didn't include JSON functionality in Cocoa until 2011, that's 9 years after the public website and 5 years after inclusion i
by quesera 12y ago
> If this article is correct, Apple didn't include JSON functionality in Cocoa until 2011, that's 9 years after the public website and 5 years after inclusion in major web services.
JSON was added to Ruby stdlib in 1.9.2, released in August 2010. Available as a gem for years prior. Ruby was probably slow because YAML was the anointed format, and JSON isn't distinctly better than YAML.
JSON was added to Python modules in 2.6, which was released in October 2008. Likely available as an egg prior, but I don't remember.
There were Objective-C libraries for JSON well before 2011 too. The first one I remember using was in June or so of 2009.
So, I half agree with you. It might be hard to remember nowadays, but JSON wasn't universally seen as a Good Thing initially. It came with a lot of JavaScript baggage, which in some circles hung around for a loong time.
But Apple was definitely late to the JSON party, and it was disappointing at the time.
- tolmasky 12y agoThe biggest difference being that both Python and Ruby were module cultures, so saying that a gem existed actually means something. On the other hand, Mac dev didn't have Cocoapods until 2011. Apple dev at the time (and I'd argue in large part still today), was mainly using Apple's monolithic frameworks (and downloading AFNetworking source code to include in your project), so it was much more important for it to be included in the standard library. However, the point still stands that we now have a new language that still does not have this basic support.
- quesera 12y agoTrue, the ObjC culture was undeniably different than the CPAN-inspired code sharing cultures of Ruby and Python. So there were fewer quality libraries. But the libraries did exist, and Apple devs in general came from a background of C and UNIX programming, where static libs weren't an oddity. This is all different now, due to the huge influx of ObjC devs from the web world. Expectations have changed, CocoaPods emerged in response, etc. But I have no explanation for the Swift situation, except that it looks and feels like ObjC and Cocoa. I think Mattt's point is that it needn't. This might be a bit of C culture still showing through...any other conversion process would be, ultimately, magic. ObjC has never been about brevity or implicitness.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]