On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Tom Christie <[email protected]> wrote:
> Customizing the encoder (or even using DjangoJSONEncoder by default) isn't > so bad. > > I'm less convinced about the usefulness of customizing the decoder - once > you've encoded the data into JSON any additional type information is lost, > so casting back to python primitives is always going to need to be handled > explicitly. > Whether or not a configurable decoder seems useful for the situations we can think of, only allowing users to configure half of the encode/decode cycle seems odd to me. Allowing both to be configurable requires a trivial amount of extra effort to implement and maintain. Regards, Michael Manfre -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAGdCwBvV_AAS_rcZkHTC38_mJACL4uj3w2jRBckPCp0XLZ4YsA%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
