2013/4/5 Aleix Conchillo Flaqué <aconchillo@gmail.com>

> Thank you both for the comments.
>
> I must admit that I got kind of lost and I ended up not knowing if you
> had any specific suggestions for guile-json. It is my very first guile
> (scheme) package and I am pretty new to scheme.
>
> From what I understood, the main concerns were:
>
> 1. Hash tables might not be a proper way to represent JSON objects.
>
> 2. Syntax for accessing JSON objects.
>
> For 1, as Taylan mentioned, json.org clearly says that JSON objects
> are unordered. So I thought a hash table was the right data structure
> to use. I initially thought about using association lists, but that's
> ordered and performance might be worst for large objects.
>

Yes, so as it turns out, it was my ignorance that caused me to raise this
topic :)
Hash tables are fine, but I think that guile's support for them isn't
convinient, because their print representation isn't very informative
(which occured to me when I was trying to test how exactly guile-json works)


> May be it would be better to have a json-object type and procedures to
> access it (json-object-ref ...) and internally it could be a hash
> table, or an alist. Then, maybe, the user could specify if he wants to
> get ordered json-objects or not, and internally use hash tables or
> alists.
>

I think that, if the specification says that it's unordered, there's no
actual need to complicate things overly :)


> For 2, yes, a better syntax would be ideal. I don't know about
> SRFI-105, but I'll take a look into it.
>
> SRFI-105 offers only infix/m-exp notation within curly braces and a more
decent way to index arrays (using postfix brackets, as in most popular
programming languages)

Sorry if I caused unnecessary confusion ;o

Best regards
M.