couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Smith <...@iriscouch.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, first round
Date Mon, 13 Feb 2012 00:04:44 GMT
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.

That is a strong point.

I wonder if my original opinion may be "right" only in some trivial
sense; but difficult for users. CouchDB should be relaxing.

-- 
Iris Couch

Mime
View raw message