Meme transcription:

Panel 1: Bilbo Baggins ponders, “After all… why should I care about the difference between int and String?

Panel 2: Bilbo Baggins is revealed to be an API developer. He continues, “JSON is always String, anyways…”

  • Rednax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    The worst thing is: you can’t even put an int in a json file. Only doubles. For most people that is fine, since a double can function as a 32 bit int. But not when you are using 64 bit identifiers or timestamps.

    • Ethan
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      5 months ago

      That’s an artifact of JavaScript, not JSON. The JSON spec states that numbers are a sequence of digits with up to one decimal point. Implementations are not obligated to decode numbers as floating point. Go will happily decode into a 64-bit int, or into an arbitrary precision number.

      • Aux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        What that means is that you cannot rely on numbers in JSON. Just use strings.

        • JackbyDev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Unless you’re dealing with some insanely flexible schema, you should be able to know what kind of number (int, double, and so on) a field should contain when deserializing a number field in JSON. Using a string does not provide any benefits here unless there’s some big in your deserialzation process.

          • Aux@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            What’s the point of your schema if the receiving end is JavaScript, for example? You can convert a string to BigNumber, but you’ll get wrong data if you’re sending a number.

            • JackbyDev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              I’m not following your point so I think I might be misunderstanding it. If the types of numbers you want to express are literally incapable of being expressed using JSON numbers then yes, you should absolutely use string (or maybe even an object of multiple fields).

              • lad
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                The point is that everything is expressable as JSON numbers, it’s when those numbers are read by JS there’s an issue

                • JackbyDev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Can you give a specific example? Might help me understand your point.

              • Aux@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                Because no one is using JSON.parse directly. Do you guys even code?

                • bleistift2@sopuli.xyzOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  It’s neither JSON’s nor JavaScript’s fault that you don’t want to make a simple function call to properly deserialize the data.