SebastianVerified account

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)?

Fwiw I don't like rjson, it's rome specific and doesn't roll of the tongue like at all

I just hate that now tooling will not like it. Think prettier, eslint, intellij etc. So would be nice if Rome will allow plain jane json, but for fancies rjson and you'd have to vet the tradeoffs

Everything should be cosmiconfig compatible. So micro projects that want minimal things in a package.json, should work. Or more extreme config should allow yml, json or js