SebastianVerified account

This sounds awesome why would you not use this

I got self conscious when I did the Rome deep dive for the RN + React team because I got feedback that I spent too long talking about it and that it seemed friviulous and made my focus seem frantic

Too long talking about the config format, you mean? It distracted from Rome itself?

I was demoing all the features of Rome in like a 20 minute meeting and I spent half of it talking about the JSON parser because I had just finished it and was excited

hahaha fair enough. It does sound like a lot of extensions to JSON, my question would be whether it’s losslessly convertible to JSON, so things like NaN/Dates aren’t? I think if you have a file format that’s 1:1 convertible to/from JSON it’ll then need no explanation.

Going back to my original format but without the extra data types sounds like a good idea then and would fulfill those requirements. I guess I'll throw out the TOML parser I just wrote... I'll see how I'm feeling about it tomorrow lol

Love the spec. Not sure on the name, “son” just feels a little… short? It’s definitely an extension to JSON, not a subset? RJson could be Rome-JSON or Reworked-JSON or something. Or you could go PJson (practical/pliable/pretty) or UJson (unrestricted)?