Eric Blake writes:
> On 06/16/2016 10:17 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Eric Blake writes:
>>
>>> It's better to give downstream clients a valid JSON string,
>>> even if they are semantically expecting a number, than it is
>>> to give them a bare keyword extension that can cause a
>>> lexical
On 06/16/2016 10:17 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Eric Blake writes:
>
>> It's better to give downstream clients a valid JSON string,
>> even if they are semantically expecting a number, than it is
>> to give them a bare keyword extension that can cause a
>> lexical error.
>
> Incompatible chan
Eric Blake writes:
> It's better to give downstream clients a valid JSON string,
> even if they are semantically expecting a number, than it is
> to give them a bare keyword extension that can cause a
> lexical error.
Incompatible change. If all clients are choking on non-finite numbers,
then t
It's better to give downstream clients a valid JSON string,
even if they are semantically expecting a number, than it is
to give them a bare keyword extension that can cause a
lexical error.
Of course, as long as we don't recognize (certain) strings as valid
numbers during a conversion to QObject,
