| Re: [jsonp-dev] AbstractJsonObject and AbstractJsonArray |
I am personally unsure what to think of this but want to give it the benefit of the doubt. Dmitry is understandably skeptical as this shifts existing API paradigms and does not really add substantial feature capabilities as far as I can see. I would also request that other users and committers weigh in. Besides, I think it is time we spun up some conversations around Jakarta EE API development. Reza Rahman Jakarta EE Ambassador, Author, Speaker, Blogger Please note views expressed here are my own as an individual community member and do not reflect the views of my employer. Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone -------- Original message -------- From: "Mihai A." <amihaiemil@xxxxxxxxx> Date: 2/3/20 1:49 AM (GMT-08:00) To: jsonp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [jsonp-dev] AbstractJsonObject and AbstractJsonArray Hi all,
I was told I had to open a discussion in this mailing list, in order for my Feature Request to be accepted. I've provided the following Pull Request to the ee4j/json-p repo:
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jsonp/pull/227 I am a strong advocate for Object-Oriented Programming and I believe these 2 classes (AbstractJsonObject and AbstractJsonArray) are needed in order to help the user implement their own JsonObject and JsonArray where needed. See the JavaDocs in the PR, for examples of usage. I personally implement my own JsonObject/JsonArray quite often. Furthermore I believe these classes should reside in the API because they are provider-agnostic. I believe the API should implement as much provider-agnostic functionality as possible. Please, let me know what you think, or comment on the Pull Request or its corresponding Issue. Best regards, Mihai |