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

Add new choice for JsonFormat.Shape, NATURAL #65

Closed
cowtowncoder opened this issue Jul 22, 2015 · 0 comments
Closed

Add new choice for JsonFormat.Shape, NATURAL #65

cowtowncoder opened this issue Jul 22, 2015 · 0 comments
Milestone

Comments

@cowtowncoder
Copy link
Member

(for background, see FasterXML/jackson-databind#865)

In addition to existing choices, including pseudo-value of ANY (which is similar to null as annotations do not allow explicit null value), it would make sense to add something to indicate use of the "most natural" binding (in case where there are more than one physical shape, but different structure; mostly for OBJECT, but possibly also ARRAY or even STRING), or, in case of type extensions, an alternative underlying format. An example of latter would be binary type (matching byte[]) that some formats (like Smile, CBOR, Protobuf) support.
While it would also be possible to add explicit BINARY type, it seems better use a logical higher-level concept of "NATIVE" or "NATURAL", since this can be used for all kinds of underlying "exotic" types; for example, type menagerie exposed by BSON.

Of choices, NATURAL seems slightly preferable.

@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder changed the title (2.7) Consider adding new choice for JsonFormat.Shape, maybe NATIVE or NATURAL (2.8) Consider adding new choice for JsonFormat.Shape, maybe NATIVE or NATURAL Dec 11, 2015
@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder changed the title (2.8) Consider adding new choice for JsonFormat.Shape, maybe NATIVE or NATURAL Add new choice for JsonFormat.Shape, NATURAL May 20, 2016
@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder added this to the 2.8.0 milestone May 20, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant