On 05/20/2010 12:43 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
The JSON specification explicitly says:
"A JSON parser transforms a JSON text into another representation. A
JSON parser MUST accept all texts that conform to the JSON grammar. A
JSON parser MAY accept non-JSON forms or extensions."
IOW, we're under no obligation to reject extensions and I can't think
of a reason why we should.
At the very least, we should document them. If the extension doesn't
add any value but is merely a side effect of the implementation, we
should remove it.
Examples where this could hurt us:
- we move to a json parsing library, the extension disappears, client breaks
- someone writes a qemu simulator to test managment tool scalability
(run zillions of fake guests on one machine), client breaks
- someone writes a debug tool that interposes between client and qemu,
client breaks
- the json specification adds a new form that conflicts with one of our
extensions [1], we can't use the new form
Being strict in what we accept will reduce our support burden later on.
[1] allowing infinite extensibility like this is irresponsible
--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to
panic.
