couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benoit Chesneau <bchesn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, first round
Date Sun, 12 Feb 2012 14:58:18 GMT
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Jason Smith <jhs@iriscouch.com> wrote:
> tl;dr = Minor disagreement with Benoit but happy to go with his decision.
>
> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Jason Smith <jhs@iriscouch.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>> well as a database, CouchDB shouldn't change the way data are saved
>>>> in. I expect that the number I saved under the json type Number [1]
>>>> defined by the spec [2] is correctly saved and returned as is. No
>>>> roundtrip or precision lost should happen.
>>>
>>> Okay. "JSON type Number" is incoherent. JSON has only numerals, no
>>> numbers. JavaScript standards are as relevant as FORTRAN standards.
>>> But may we continue that discussion in JIRA?
>>>
>> I don't follow. JSON describes a number type, and refers to another
>> iso standard too. How it's incoherent.
>
> I could be wrong but I don't see a reference to an ISO or similar
> standard. I am reading RFC 4627.
>
The spec let me think that number should follow the ECMA-754 [1] . But
i will double check.

Anyway for me a document is a data I post on the disc and it seems
reasonable to get the same result when I want to get it back.

If it's not a regression, it isn't really a blocker I think. But I
think we should definitely fix it.

- benoƮt

[1] http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=4610935

Mime
View raw message