json VS cyanide

I have not done a "desktop" program in 25+ years and never using C++ (or C), since then I'm mostly a web developer (PHP,Elixir, JS, Kotlin etc).

I'm currently doing a C++ audio plugin with the Juce framework.

This website has been a good resource, alongside https://www.learncpp.com

But I was actually close to give up before using those two things:

- https://github.com/nlohmann/json : my plugin use a json api backend and the Juce json implementation is atrocious (apparently because of being born in previous c++ version), but this library is GREAT.

- ChatGPT 4. I'm not sure I would have "succeeded" without it, at least not in a reasonable time frame. ChatGPT 3.5 is slow and does not give good results for my use case but 4 is impressive. And I use in a very dumb way, just posing question in the web UI. I probably could have it directly in MSVC?

Also I must say, for all its flaws, I have a renewed appreciation for doing UI on the web ;)

https://github.com/nlohmann/json works well for me

cmake_minimum_required(VERSION 3.15) project(xrpc++ DESCRIPTION "C++ AT Protocol XRPC library" VERSION 1.0.0 LANGUAGES CXX) include(FetchContent) FetchContent_Declare(cpr GIT_REPOSITORY https://github.com/libcpr/cpr.git GIT_TAG 2553fc41450301cd09a9271c8d2c3e0cf3546b73) # The commit hash for 1.10.x. Replace with the latest from: https://github.com/libcpr/cpr/releases FetchContent_MakeAvailable(cpr) FetchContent_Declare(json URL https://github.com/nlohmann/json/releases/download/v3.11.2/json.tar.xz) FetchContent_MakeAvailable(json) add_library(${PROJECT_NAME} SHARED src/lexicon.cpp src/xrpc.cpp ) target_link_libraries(${PROJECT_NAME} PRIVATE cpr::cpr) target_link_libraries(${PROJECT_NAME} PRIVATE nlohmann_json::nlohmann_json) set_target_properties(${PROJECT_NAME} PROPERTIES VERSION ${PROJECT_VERSION}) set_target_properties(${PROJECT_NAME} PROPERTIES SOVERSION 1) target_include_directories(${PROJECT_NAME} PUBLIC include) set(CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE debug)

FetchContent_Declare(json URL https://github.com/nlohmann/json/releases/download/v3.11.2/json.tar.xz) FetchContent_MakeAvailable(json)

Here is one popular C++ library (nlohmann/json) removing its use.

Before going into binary serialization I suggest you to get comfortable with serialization to text. You can try to write your data to text files and read them in again. Then after you get an idea of how this works you can try to use a library that writes to XML or json, e.g. nlohmann json

Download the single header file json.hpp from https://github.com/nlohmann/json/releases and place it in your project directory or an include directory.

Exemple of a JSON library: https://github.com/nlohmann/json (For XML, there's tinyxml)

No, it stands for "Binary JSON".

BSON specification

I recommend looking at https://ubjson.org and https://bsonspec.org , this will answer most of your questions.

or https://bsonspec.org/

BJSON Binary JSON, with a Swift Library here and should be one for your other end

Starting this tutorial we specified that data in MongoDB is stored in collections. We also specified that in MongoDB we use syntax similar to JSON. That syntax is called "Binary JSON" or BSON. BSON is similar to JSON; but it's more like an encoded serialization of JSON. We can find useful information in the BSON website.

> I'm saying that when you decode an Avro document, the result that comes out (presuming you don't tell the Avro decoder anything special about custom types your runtime supports and how it should map them) is a JSON document.

Semantic point: it's not a "document".

There are tools which will decode Avro and output the data in JSON (typically using the JSON encoding of Avro: https://avro.apache.org/docs/current/spec.html#json_encoding), but the ADT that is created is by no means a JSON document. The ADT that is created has more complex semantics than JSON; JSON is not the canonical representation.

> By which I don't mean JSON-encoded text, but rather an in-memory ADT that has the exact set of types that exist in JSON, no more and no less.

Except Avro has data types that are not the exact set of types that exist in JSON. The first clue on this might be that the Avro spec includes mappings that list how primitive Avro types are mapped to JSON types.

> Or, to put that another way, Avro is a way to encode JSON-typed data, just as "JSON text", or https://bsonspec.org/, is a way to encode JSON-typed data

BSON, by design, was meant to be a more efficient way to encode JSON data, so yes, it is a way to encode JSON-typed data. Avro, however, was not defined as a way to encode JSON data. It was defined as a way to encode data (with a degree of specialization for the case of Hadoop sequence files, where you are generally storing a large number of small records in one file).

A simple counter example: Avro has a "float" type, which is a 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point number. Neither JSON nor BSON have that type.

Technically, JSON doesn't really have types, it has values, but even if you pretend that JavaScript's types are JSON's types, there's nothing "canonical" about JavaScript's types for Avro.

Yes, you can represent JSON data in Avro, and Avro in JSON, much as you can represent data in two different serialization formats. Avro's data model is very much defined independently of JSON's data model (as you'd expect).

For me, this exploration started when I was attempting to improve handling of Unicode surrogate pair values in the MongoDB Go driver's Extended JSON unmarshaler. The Extended JSON format is an extension to the standard JSON format that adds type information and allows deterministic conversion to and from BSON.