On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Robert Newson <[email protected]> wrote: > The first time I encountered CouchDB's (or, strictly, SpiderMonkey's) > rather deficient number handling was quite sobering. I hear Paul's > concern that JSON doesn't define anything useful for numbers at all > (I'd argue that its specification is actually worse than useless). For > 1.2.0, I'd be +1 on removing the obvious regression that %g > introduced.
+1 > For 1.3.0, I'd love to see some formalization of how > CouchDB handles numbers (with an explicit promise to remain compatible > in future releases). I'd prefer a transparently lossless approach but > the edge cases might be too much to handle. After all, erlang > automatically handles big integers if you overflow but is also > silently converts integers to decimals if you're not careful. > > Shorter Version: CouchDB should have first-class support for numerical > data, over and above the JSON spec. > +1 - benoît
