No. I'm talking about collisions when multiple deserialization functions are added from different sources. It cannot be a global setting.
-S On Sep 3, 1:28 pm, Dmitri <dmitri.sotni...@gmail.com> wrote: > The problem I was trying to avoid is having to do a second pass over > the data after it comes out of the parser, it's more expensive and > it's also ugly for nested data structures. Would using defonce- and > defmacro- from clojure-contrib address the problem with namespace > collisions? > > On Sep 3, 12:01 pm, Stuart Sierra <the.stuart.sie...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > You can already extend the Write-JSON protocol to any type. But it > > doesn't work in reverse. JSON has no standardized way to express types > > beyond Object/Array/String/Number, so any deserialization will always > > be application-specific. > > > -S > > > On Sep 3, 8:58 am, Baishampayan Ghose <b.gh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Sorry, I can't accept any patch that modifies behavior globally. What > > > > happens when two different libraries try to parse JSON with different > > > > deserializers? > > > > > The only thing I would consider is a function that is passed into read- > > > > json and invoked in read-json-object. But even that seems like adding > > > > unnecessary complication to the library. > > > > Just curious, but does using protocols in clojure.contrib.json help? > > > May be people can extend the protocol to their types and make them > > > serializable to JSON and vice versa? > > > > Regards, > > > BG > > > > -- > > > Baishampayan Ghose > > > b.ghose at gmail.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
