Re: Help in JSON encode/decode project

[Kai Torben Ohlhus]

On 3/9/20 3:14 PM, Andrew Janke wrote
> On 3/9/20 2:01 AM, Kai Torben Ohlhus wrote:
>> On 3/9/20 2:56 PM, Andrew Janke wrote:
>>>
>>> I took a look in to RapidJSON and agree that it looks like a better
>>> library for this than jsoncpp, both for performance, and code quality &
>>> documentation.
>>
>>
>> Now I am curious how did you get convinced of this change?  Did you run
>> some large scale tests yourself?
>>
>> Best,
>> Kai
>>
> 
> No, I don't have time for that. :)
> 
> I took a look at this benchmark [1] (which happens to be by the author
> of RapidJSON) and thought it was pretty convincing; the code is put
> together well, and I see it referenced in a lot of places. It shows a
> pretty stark performance difference between jsoncpp and RapidJSON. And
> the fact that the library author actually made and ran benchmarks made
> me think well of RapidJSON. I saw a couple other benchmarks floating
> around in which RapidJSON also beat out jsoncpp.
> 
> Then I took a look at the RapidJSON library itself, reading through its
> documentation and part of its codebase, and reviewing its GitHub
> activity. This struck me as a high quality library. I like its API a bit
> better than jsoncpp's, and it's much better documented. The author
> clearly also *gets* Unicode encoding and the subtleties of the various
> definitions and "standards" for JSON. So I decided I was more
> comfortable using RapidJSON than jsoncpp, even if performance weren't a
> factor.
> 
> Since RapidJSON is a header-only library, it was easy to vendor it into
> the JsonStuff project and make the transition without introducing any
> external dependencies, so I went ahead and did it.
> 
> Cheers,
> Andrew
> 
> [1] https://github.com/miloyip/nativejson-benchmark
> 

Thank you for sharing the link Andrew.  Indeed very comprehensive
benchmark.  This simplifies the back-end decision a lot.

Kai