python-rapidjson VS ultrajson

> * Human readable

Computers are the main consumers of APIs, and ISO 8601 is far from machine-readable.

For example, in Elixir, DateTime.from_iso8601/1 won't recognize "2022-03-12T07:36:08" even though it's valid. I had to rewrite a chunk of Python's radidjson wrapper to 1-9 digit fractional seconds (1).

I'm willing to bet 99% of ISO8601 will fail to handle all aspects of the spec. So when you say "ISO8601" what you're really saying is "our [probably undocumented, and possibly different depending on what system you're hitting] version of the ISO-86001 spec."

(1) https://github.com/python-rapidjson/python-rapidjson/pull/13...

ujson

For most cases, you would want to go with python’s standard json library which removes dependencies on other libraries. On other hand you could try out ujsonwhich is simple replacement for python’s json library. If you want more speed and also want dataclass, datetime, numpy, and UUID instances and you are ready to deal with more complex code, then you can try your hands on orjson

I asked about this on the Github issue regarding these benchmarks as well.

I'm curious as to why libraries like ultrajson[0] and orjson[1] weren't explored. They aren't command line tools, but neither is pandas right? Is it perhaps because the code required to implement the challenges is large enough that they are considered too inconvenient to use through the same way pandas was used (ie, `python -c "..."`)?

[0] https://github.com/ultrajson/ultrajson