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

Integrate taocpp::json #69

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 11, 2018
Merged

Integrate taocpp::json #69

merged 3 commits into from
May 11, 2018

Conversation

ColinH
Copy link
Contributor

@ColinH ColinH commented May 10, 2018

This pull request

  • uses tao::optional, which is an alias for std::optional when available, instead of boost::optional, and
  • uses taocpp/json for JSON string escaping (in a more efficient way).

Note that tao::optional is a part of taocpp/json because JSON needs an optional in its API, and we include a copy of an experimental optional to keep compatibility with C++11.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 10, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #69 into master will increase coverage by 0.12%.
The diff coverage is 0%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #69      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   16.76%   16.89%   +0.12%     
==========================================
  Files         184      183       -1     
  Lines       31025    30793     -232     
==========================================
  Hits         5202     5202              
+ Misses      25823    25591     -232

@lambdafu
Copy link
Collaborator

Ok, thanks. Migrating away from boost for standard stuff is certainly desirable. I am not invested heavily in nlohmann/json at this point, but I am invested in pegtl and taocpp/json is powerful and fast, so I don't mind migrating. There is a performance comparison at https://github.com/miloyip/nativejson-benchmark, where taocpp/json comes out ahead of nlohmann in performance, although not in code size.

@lambdafu lambdafu merged commit 13ac927 into das-labor:master May 11, 2018
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants