Re: mapping data formats imported from C libraries

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>]

Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:

> Yeah, I've seen the mess that libxml2 and json.el produce (not the
> coder's fault, it's just a pain to adapt without native types).  It
> doesn't help that XML/SGML and Lisp are inbred cousins :)
>
> * it's a pain to distinguish JSON's `false' and `null' while using them
>   in code

Well, I don't think that's a DOM point.  

> * in json.el you pick the key-value storage method! yay!
>
> * in json.el you pick the array storage method! yay!
>
> * JSON data is not a tree

Sure it is.

{"a": {"b": [1, 2], "c": 4}}

> My ideal mapping from libjson and libyaml would be:
>
> * unambiguous: you can reconstruct a canonical version of the input
>   stream from the parse data, as much as possible (JSON is better at this)

Trivial from the Emacs DOM.

> * native: you can iterate over JSON arrays as Lisp lists, and JSON
>   key-value mappings as alists.  JSON's `false' and `null' are both
>   false in Lisp boolean context.

Outside the scope of the DOM.

> * clean: no extra cons cells for attributes

Doesn't matter.  :-)

> * readable: this is huge IMO, to be able to pretty-print the data and
>   quickly see what it contains... one of the things I like about JSON
>   vs. SGML/XML.

`pp' prints the DOM real purdy like.  I've web scraped bunches and
bunches of pages, and reading the DOM in the *scratch* buffer is really
easy.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no