Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Can we have YAML Support #269

Open
patternoia opened this issue Sep 8, 2020 · 3 comments
Open

Can we have YAML Support #269

patternoia opened this issue Sep 8, 2020 · 3 comments

Comments

@patternoia
Copy link
Contributor

Describe the proposed feature

Dear Daniel,

I understand the library is called jsoncons and I understand I might be asking for too much.
However, jsoncons became for me the serialization lib of choice with its beautiful mappings and ease of use. Using any other tools and writing mappings just feels too cumbersome.

Can you think about adding the YAML extension to jsoncons, since YAML is a superset of JSON and both formats are closely related?

Cheers,
pat.

What other libraries (C++ or other) have this feature?

yaml-cpp has an implementation which is somewhat similar to jsoncons' approach.

@danielaparker
Copy link
Owner

danielaparker commented Oct 16, 2020

Okay, it's on the list. I've been studying the C library libyaml, which looks to me to be very nicely designed, and I think we can have a C++ header only counterpart that sends events to or receives events through jsoncons visitors. libyaml is interesting, it's likely that some of the ideas in libyaml will find their way into other jsoncons parsers.

We'll aim to support YAML 1.2, which brings YAML into compliance with JSON as an official subset.

@patternoia
Copy link
Contributor Author

Splendid news! Big heads up for this.

@edobez
Copy link

edobez commented Aug 8, 2023

Is there any update on this topic? I see there is a branch for the yaml extension but I can't judge how far it is.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants