.Net Foundation Design Reviews, 25 Apr 2019

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: .NET Design Review: JSON

Description

00:00:00 - Approved: Should Utf8JsonReader expose TokenStartIndex? https://github.com/dotnet/corefx/issues/33967

A

A

A

On the reader, the the user can see can get tokens from the payload then and that token stored inside or either a sequence or a span, and that they get that to the values, my property or value seekers property. The thing that the user does not get access to is where, in the payload, this token starts, and there is no good way for the user to compute, where the token starts drop it out to unsafe code or doing some interesting tricks.

A

That Jamie did on the gesture document, which only was exactly for spares um and that's because the reader eagerly eats whitespace or gross.

B

A

Or a spare and that they get that it makes it difficult for people to reason about based on all the different corner cases. What they took is star index would point to. So the solution is exposed to token start index on the reader as a property, I will be an INT in 64, and that may the caller does not have to deal with remembering byte offsets or cracking bytes consume and doing some offsets of the ad based on token types.

A

So this will give you exactly where, in the payload the token started for Strings and property names, it would be right before the strike code and for all other tokus would be like right right at where they're supposed to be, for example, for started before the square bracket square bracket for comets will be right before the double slash. When.

B

You say before you mean that if you did span of tokens start index, you will get.

A

Exactly so on the reader you have is sort some of the relevant properties. We have current depth, we have bite consumed, we have position and token type etc. So this was just under than you or property toka start index. The only question I had was around naming, which is, do you want it to be value, stored index to map, to value span, value sequence, or do you want it to be element store index, Matt, just an element or do we keep talking started next because we have to type as well.

A

Any car choking it's called API in general tokens.

B

Start index I'm fine, because it's also the problem with value is particular for a string or a property name and how you spend in value sequence or what's between the quotes and the token index is right. I think it's like it's.

B

If you're looking at it, you're already doing something advanced so calling it took it to say that it's slightly different for value seems.

A

And what's the difference between value and this state so token star index points to before the code for Strings and poverty name and value span is natural stringing contents. You see.

C

That off by one for Strings and then.

B

Bytes consumed token start index is always at least value spanner value sequence that we could be greater by space quotations.

D

A

Cool Iman, eight any feedback or because all right.

E

There is emo Easter girl.

F

A

Okay, now for the more interesting topic which is escaping and encoding, so there's there's two prime to merge motivations for this API. One of them is the user, has string, literals or known constant strings that are already either P escape, or they know they don't need to be a scared. The rider today doesn't provide an ability for them to skip the scape check and the scape escaping checking for skipping ends up becoming maybe ten to fifty percent slower based on some particular payload and the solution.

A

Previously, the solution was we just passed in boolean to say: hey, I know this already escaped, don't escape and just copy directly to the output JSON encoded, however, that lets users passing potentially invalid key fit or embedded course within the spanners or you debate by today they are they're sending. So we want to be able to still validate and check that. The straying that they're passing is correct but skip the stepping check on right and per day, and if you look at Allah.

G

I mean previously sorry just to confirm like in this case, escaping you mean like escaping any non as character, so.

A

Escaping would mean I gotta cover skipping non-ascii escaping some of the addition requires, like backslash, escaping appropriate. Yes, always skipping as much as possible for as part of the distance back and to be secure in terms of if it's embedded in HTML, others and.

E

Moreover, some non ASCII characters don't really write. Yeah.

A

E

It has not not really much to do with ask you're not asked okay.

B

Right so the current mode of what it's doing so. The current overload is anything, that's not a ski and then anything that the spec says it has to be and then busing equals and that.

G

Person, that's.

B

G

B

So then, with this.

A

Regarding the first motivation, around users want to be locked up into skipping escape check in single. Are we have code like this? Where you have a little string and you store in a biker you, you give a bike path, dialogue and set forth since the user already has this upfront cost anyway. We, the solution, was to get the validation and do not have the users single like right. Bytes like this people, why funky type or json encoded text and you pass in differing little etc, and you show that is like so.

E

Why is it the class we.

A

Get to that, I just I were transferred to motivations and we get out was a beard. So second point: the reason why we did this we over escaped is for defense in depth. Aside from the fact that users could have string literals, they also want customization of what they want to be asked what to want to escape. So we over scale escape the plus ampersand, etc, but some people wanna opt out of donors over escape the noisy characters, the attacked on human readability.

A

The only concerned people's the only performance we concerned that people would this would result in is escaping ends up bloating the payroll size by to 6x definitely alone. So people want to shrink that as well. So that's what they would wanna opt into this behavior. So because these two motivations, we have the least enjoyed tax type. The first three sets of constructors basically solves. The first motivation, which is, he already know, is the string literal. That's escaped I'm not doing any custom. I don't want customize. My skipping I'll just use default skipping logic.

A

That decision right it has I don't want to, since is literature. I know is P, encoded string don't escape and the second one is extensibility point of those don't escape where those default escape well from the context of this API, it's don't escape, but.

B

D

So once you have this time and he passes right at the right of mahon- escape okay yeah, you don't put a pre escape string as the implement yeah, of course, but.

E

I think it does point at one of the issues that I was thinking about, which is it's not super clear. Whether calling this constructor means I entire ante that the text is already escaped or I give you some text. Please describe it for me. So then I get an escaped result right. So this.

A

Thing, you can pass an escape string and it was s effectively, do not know if it's or it or no, it is valid it and it.

B

Would have to because if you passed it an escape thing, it would have to assume that the backslash that you had in there you wanted to be a backslash it'll turn into backslash backslash. There is no, oh, yes get it sorry. This is.

D

You give me stream little yeah right, so this will give you the string, you bossing the strings of this type and it will escape for you and then it will say the escape value, use it over and over right.

E

So this is some people may think that well I need, you know, say it's an escape text, so I need to give it an escape test right.

H

Maybe like a static escape yeah yeah.

B

So, instead of a constructor using a static, a static, so you can name it like default escape or something creator.

H

Well, you can call it basically an escape, that's something like that. So.

A

If you have a static factory that takes these inputs span, sirtuins McCoy create a scalar well.

E

Another another approach would be I, don't know what you use for escaping are using the web. Encoding said yes, but not today, but this is this. Is this I don't know if you want to take dependency in api's, but imagine that these constructors would take. You know this. Caper is a parameter, then it's clear that they will be as if that's the second set of rafters yeah wish to take the JavaScript in code. These are very clear what they are doing, I'm passing a string and then this caper. Clearly they will.

E

You know this constructor would call the escaping on this string and then store it right.

A

So you say the first three should just be factory method.

E

Do we need the first three, given that we have those? Do we need them? What do they do? Three, basically, just use the default. Is that what it is so.

A

One of the questions I had is we have optional parameter or null defaults to be.

E

Fun encoder yeah, so maybe if they were not overloads, but rather they just you know you defaulted. This show and call them to do something. I guess it has to be. No, yes, and now at least it would be a clue that, like you know, escaping, is built in okay and that's.

A

Why I initially had but I've made them non overload? They actually all those not often parameters, because I thought that it would be simpler because you don't want necessary, want to pass it in a JavaScript encoder. When you have been ashamed, it hurts. But it's fine.

E

Yeah I mean in general, I'm, not the biggest fan of default parameters, but in this case I think it's actually in a weird sense. It's basically communicates what this IP is. Behavior is sure. Okay,.

B

Will you expect as the constructor or shed? Would you still make it a static I would go with in code? Is the name of the method given that it produces an encoded? That's another escape text. I would.

I

Agree of Jeremy because the other problem is even if you got by the intellisense at this encodes imagine you would look at github, which just so many submits at they are so like you just see. Basically the line of code way. Somebody says: VAR text equals new json encoded text and then some some value. It's not clear whether that means in code or not like. I don't see the constructor signatures at that point. So.

E

I think it would find, but then we would not have constructors if we don't have constructors there's. Basically one way of creating these things is by calling some encoding methods. I. Think it's reasonable construct. You know it will be a bit less discoverable like the eyes like people, our customers tend to try to find a constructor first, but I think it's fine. What I think would be a mistake is to have both the static methods and constructors yeah.

B

A

So, which way are we leaning constructors, assuming that we have default parameter for the encoder I? Think.

B

The method the static method makes it more clear that organ is happening. Okay, so in.

J

This case, this.

B

The static factory just again it just helps understand, what's going on and then, if we felt like being weird and adding a free and cody thingy later, that would be another battery.

A

Okay, so to go over the rest of the EPS, and then we can come back to all the rest, of course, on the head we does. This encoder will be the extension point for in Jason Ryder options as well, so using the pass in the JavaScript encoder that they want to use, and we would use that rather the Foley encoder while escaping this is the way to up like it's aside from skipping and skipping or skipping encoding. It's the user bunch of customized all up I'm passing you data just use this encoder that separated so.

I

Is it so basically, then, when you pass in no encoder, the the encoder property will return now from the encoded text and.

A

Before jóska encode or decode so.

I

How do you know which one to use then.

A

What do you mean so.

K

Writer options, the highlighted.

I

Yes, so may see when you on the writer, where you receive an actual Jason, a JavaScript encoded text, you know where they use the one that is in that instance,.

A

That's one of our questions: whether we choose the rider the rider option overrides it or the Jason text, we could override it. That's one of my questions. I have today. I can talk about it a little bit right.

I

A

I

Just say, then, just make it return null in the encoded text and then say well, whoever writes that chooses the default, and then you only use the encoder on the options. If somebody didn't specify that'll make for the text except.

A

You may want to have specific encoded text for what some literals, but not have the default value on everything else. Yeah.

I

That's what I mean so, basically you you basically saying most of the time: I, don't actually instantiate adjacent encoded text of a specific end code, in which case I used the one that is in the options, but if I do specify them and it's the one I want to use.

J

I

Than the ambient.

B

Most attacks are gonna, be saved as private static I. Don't.

A

Know the driver options. There are options earlier to the rider so, if reason yeah so therefore this encoder that is passed in traditional reference, it's not visible to the Jason text, encoded type, so.

I

That's the I'm saying if you don't specify one it's now, in which case the writer will basically have to say well, does the encoded text if the property said no great I used to run home the ride, it's.

B

When you call the factory met that it's going to do the encoding and save the answer permanently so changing the encoder changes, the answer which defeats the pre in pre escaping right. So so maybe.

A

If I, so on the right side, you have all of the text ring, and this is where the JSON encoded touch will be passed on.

I

It almost sounds like you want the encode method to be on the writer instead. Well, that's the.

B

The writer takes, or has the accepts, the encoder for what it should do when you give it a string or a span of char, but.

E

Also, you don't want it to be on the writer, because then you would would you expect that it encodes every single time, because I'm.

I

Saying, like just put the method and code on the writer that returns, your encoded text.

E

And then you would just call write, write string down code, no, it doesn't solve the problem, because I could basically called encode method on one encode it on the one writer and then pass the encoded text to another writer that has a different in color set and now yeah I. You know we'll get back to the original problem. There are mainly two different writers and they may have two different in Congress set right.

L

But then turn there just be an option for right without the writer re-encoding it basically right and already encoded string. That's what.

L

It's like did that just be an option built into the writer for write this string exactly as I give it and write it as encoded. That's what we do for like HTML and everything else. You've got both oh right.

M

So that's not what we have for HTML. What we have for HTML is asp.net, has a has the HTML string type where you create that type, which is a wrapper around data which is already encoded and then, when it gets written to the wire the writer just says. Oh, it's already escaped. Let me just go as is like this is kind of the same concept like this is meant to replace the boolean parameter. This has already escaped.

I

What the idea why you would put it on the writer is to just get the policy. What is the default encoder, but once you instantiate it a JSON, encoded text, it's encoded in whatever encoding you used right or whatever encoder use. So if you, if you call right, if you get, if you call in code on one writer and you get back a JSON encoded text and you pass it to another writer, it will just write it exactly as it's embedding it like. As that, guy was encoded. You know.

H

Specific motion thank.

E

But what would it accomplish, then I thought we were trying to solve the problem of it's not clear.

E

Boulder was used to encode this chain, no.

I

I think that would you go your accomplishes, you can differentiate between encoded an encoded, but if it's encoded, that's the video, we are going to write, no matter what encoder was use. So why do.

E

We need to it's.

B

Not acceptable enough, why not if it was, if you built the your your original thing using a utf-8 is legal and now you're in a different stream. That says that it's going to be doing ASCII only or you tf7, then you can't let utf-8 raw bytes go out. You have to re-encode them for the current transport right, but that's transcoding rather than the escaping right. Well,.

J

Notice, whether.

B

Or not a YouTube whether you can write utf-8 as the bytes and since we take sort of utf-8 as bytes in here. It's a doesn't need to take it from utf-8 into the Jason utf-16 of scope, the UTS escape sequence. So.

M

I like adding it but like you, don't nut, has had this behavior since 3.5 and it hasn't been a problem in practice generally. The reason that's not a problem is because people just don't replace the escaper right just in practice. It doesn't happen.

A

Effectively the 90% use case would be, somebody has string literals, they create adjacent encoded text on it and it matches the default escape or that we use as matches edition default escape. It was used to create this text, and the this is value already code is all this true. There will be the 90% case in a custom case where somebody wants to use your custom. Escaper is when this would be false and we were really following the Jason Ryder's past in a skipper. You.

N

A

Because the Jason Wright is that local and the Jason cortex is the global, so why do you mean he wants to make this like this.

E

Is now a Lacey's schedule, it.

M

Shouldn't be lazy, is it lazy well.

E

Compatible then okay, why don't we have them? A property code is already encoded. If it's not lazy, then yes, it is.

A

Encoded no, so this thing this is all in code: it takes in an encoder okay, so is it already coded? According to this encoder.

E

A

Either it's the encoder was equal or really couldn't see. If the bad is y.

E

Equals is a referential equality. I think we are I mean like over-engineering here. What would you I would just not make it lazy and he you know like in most cases it just works. We trying to basically in colder escape the string in the constructor of the jens's json encoded text yeah. Now we can make it this chart, it doesn't need to be a class very lightweight.

E

And yes, if you start messing up with with encoders and changing from the default, it's difficult to get it do exactly what you want, but you know you already like one percent customer so.

M

Make him making a destruct has other consequences, which I don't think we want to go down.

M

For example, it means it would be very difficult for us to add fields to it in the future if we need to right now what is its representation internally, utf-8 or utf-16 or both, and if it's both does that mean we have struck staring issues that we have to worry about, because we can't store both in a single field, for instance,.

N

M

Class also just makes it easier to consume and use like the the typical use case, for this is something like a serializer just creates a bunch of these ahead of time and then just reuses them over and over and over again done.

E

Well, the thing is that they started now. You have two objects on the heap for everything correct. Only.

M

For things that you're going to be writing out very commonly as part of the payload like you're trading off a little bit more memory usage for higher performance overall, because you're skipping work. What.

E

Work is keeping the inventory if they were structs. You would also skip the encoding step. So, let's you know like what do we get.

O

E

I mean we use charts, they all have telling issues like the main line scenarios you put them in statics and you done with them. There's no, you know yes tearing can happen with an extract, that's not like we, we don't care guidelines, don't use drugs because they can be told.

M

There's no real reason for this to be a struct, though like I, but what does it actually get us.

E

What does it get us that it's a.

M

Class I think that might develop. Everything is the class unless it has a reason to be a struct. It's just easier to use and reason about so.

B

In, in particular, the use of this isn't just utf-8 and so, as as we buy more use than the encode may start to grow the number of fields so now passing it becomes you're, not passing one pointer, you're, passing eight byte, arrays or.

F

Twelve by two rays or, however, they like okay, we can always successful eight to eight or whatnot like I'm. Just like it's it's. This is I.

B

Like I agreed that there's no purpose in this being a stocked.

B

I

Right so let's say we would say: JSON encoded text, it's basically the ad you.

J

Have pre-canned.

I

Encodings for for common literals that you used toward your code, but let's we extend this at some point to support multiple encoder, so you can say you know my first name can either be utf-8 or utf-16 and I catch both of them right. If you then pass them around as structs, and you have basically lazy initialization for the other end, codings, then well. You're caching is basically going down the drain because basically you pass them by value all the time right.

I

So you know I would have to pass them by ref all the time, in particular the.

B

The you start applying multiple in code. We could, on the class, use the dictionary if I've seen a new kind of encoder I'm going to re-encode it using this kind of encoder and then I'm gonna, save the value and use it again and again and again and again, I.

E

Don't understand this area that email mentioned, because we would also do text encoding, not only JSON escaping.

M

So Allison can you scroll up to where you were exposing both the utf-16 and the utf-8 outputs as properties, so I think this I think this speaks to the point that the mo was saying. So you see those encoded, utf-8 string and encoded string properties that are being exposed. If this were a struct, we would have to generate all of those ahead of time rather than on demand, as the properties are accessed.

E

Correct do we have API that consume utf-16 bellos? No, so we are designing for like how many times have we made it? You know the mistake in the past of like adding overhead and complicating the api's for some unclear future scenarios. If we are sure that we don't have been doing this then sure we can discuss it, but it seems like this is very hypothetical. Wasn't.

M

There an actual work item to have all of the JSON stuff support utf-16. In addition to utf-8, it was just punted no.

A

That wasn't the case. It's.

B

My strong belief that we're gonna get user feedback that says they don't give a damn about utf-8, we're gonna, add.

A

It if that's hidden away from the users Andy did it I, don't hear matters, so you might not get that. So in any case, those I mean behind making us.

E

A

E

Don't feel super strong if there are some reasons I'm open, but what I'm saying is when I saw this time, my mentor model is I constructed it it either. It was for me or a specified. Encoder I now have a type. It's encoded text, it's basically an immutable thing. Yeah the moment. It's an immutable thing, it's very easy to reason. What's happening. There are no like transcoding going on. You know at runtime and whatnot the moment it's immutable. We can make it as tracked and be done with it and be very lightweight.

E

So that was my line of full.

M

View immutable as something that the developer observes is different than immutable as an implementation detail.

K

Is right now this is a minimum of two pointers struck, so it.

H

Was this my a prototype question of, like you, don't actually care about a quarter with what you do you absolutely otherwise,.

E

There's a reason for it so.

B

The reason is, if you pre escape this use, non ASCII values- and you said encode this using a utf-8 is legal to write down as utf-8 and the new billet writer that says you have to.

F

Encode everything as asking I think it's sort of you you again you mixing.

A

Of escaping, let's say you create just in query text fast, an encoder that allows you to not escape plus, yes,.

E

A

You pass it to a writer, yes,.

E

A

Says I'm going to escape plus because that's not my eyes off your yeah, you don't want let this through and not not end right, plus my escape cuz Reiner said: hey I want to skip everything well,.

B

The writer said it's in a context that it whenever I'd say plus it must be escape.

E

Well, so that's why I was asking how you know: how do we compare the encoders, because.

F

E

Are doing referential in quality and it's it's already a bit of a problem because I may have exactly same encoder. You know settings be the same behavior, yet two different references- and this is gonna- be transcoding every single time. I I call the method so I'm.

M

E

M

Don't I don't feel strongly about needing to re-encode if it gets passed to a different writer again, just because asp.net has had this behavior forever and it just hasn't been a problem. So leave my view.

A

Do you think, then the json encoded text should not be reincarnated should win and not the rider options. Encoder.

A

Is already encoded and.

E

I also think that it would make it this is what I said: I started with my mental model. This type is called encoded text. I expect it to be never in encoded, because it is an encoded text and then I pass it to some writers and it they keep transcoding at I mean it's super surprising. If I discover the dead sexy what's happening, but you could.

A

Also argue that.

E

A

Is more surprising too, because the.

G

Rider somebody clear writer, you know options say here, use this encoder, it's like. Usually you are only you own, both more things. Okay, say like Oh disallow asking this.

N

Is this is an API you use when you want to take control right like right? You wouldn't use this if you didn't want control. So the question, the point is then well.

D

The same entity control the text and the writer well in the case of something.

B

Like the serializer, the notion of it ever having seen a class before and building jason encoded text for all the property names once it adds the API that you can serialize into an already open writer that completely changes the model. The person who built the pre encoded string and the person who built the encoding options for the writer are very different. So.

A

Somebody bashed in that idea to this mm I've seen as I used it in context to build their encoded property names. The writer has his own color by.

E

The way I agree with you that you know it's surprising, I think you said surprising both ways except it's more surprising this way, because the name says that it's encoded so right.

B

B

To it, it had gained the ability to we hide a dictionary inside it and if we see a new encoder and we can determine an encoder.

A

Using better quality.

B

Rules instead of this referential equality, then we can say: oh I'll, do this set of encoding rules. I've now lazy, escaped encoded. This and I'll hold the same one. Every kiss, : lots.

E

Of complication, lots of overhead, the mainline scenario is like put it in statics I have one in code they're, like you know it.

M

E

M

It's to work like asp.net, then what it comes down like what this type represents is I. The caller have asserted that these bytes are safe to send on the wire, as is like, that is what asp.net, HTML string type means. I. Think for simplicity. We should probably just say: ours has the same contract like if you see an instance of this someone somewhere in the stack who said this is safe, has is like I guarantee that, whatever context this is being passed around in it's safe, yeah.

E

It's basically a more convenient way for the boolean that you know.

A

Levi, do you think that this type just in context, because the extension point and we remove the encoder from the writer options, or do you think it still has value to keep the encoder array of rows? Well,.

M

The encoder on the writer options is useful for values, not just property names. Okay,.

A

Yeah, that's weird yeah yeah, that's true and.

E

By the way, it's so full of values, this is also interesting I just so, there are a lot of scenarios where the values are also I have a table. There are five values that I'm gonna. Be writing, so it's not just four values is basically, we also have api's where you can pass drinks, and then we need a encoder right. There's.

A

Nothing to do whether that.

E

Value Serkis, okay, for example,.

A

Here right, you have this right overload.

I

Why do we call this json encoded text? Why is it not in the encoding step namespace and it's just encoded text for any encoded text? Well,.

B

Just encoded texts now now we chance to do the fine we encoded at once that it wins, because.

A

At all, right here.

D

Do we just specific.

A

For the json writer to say, hey, I don't need to staple it. Well,.

E

If we take this, you know this is just a bully in the 9090 that they called it is properly. We could do it. I.

M

Don't think that's a good idea, though, because we we have. We have JavaScript encoder types, HTML, encoder types and others where, instead of just exposing a base type and the reason for that is in.

J

M

Api signature, you can actually say I- expect it to be very specifically encoded for the scenario I mean it just makes it consume. That's also a lie. If you look at the jason writer options, as proposed here, asin's not taking in a base, encoder instance he's actually taking in a JavaScript encoder specifically, but.

E

Already it would be much more difficult for us to have a default like not more difficult. We basically couldn't the default encoding, correct, yeah. Thank.

A

So why apart is we don't have? This is already encoded method, the different text Justin encoded text, all all these bins, which means on the rider. Let's say if this is passed in, we always go down this path. Yeah.

M

I, don't even think you need the encoder on the Jason escape talks. To be honest,.

M

G

That thank you keep incorrect. Ok can.

M

You beat that what do you so the encoder property I, don't think you need the encoder property on the json encoded text, because if, if the caller has said like cert that this is correct for any possible context, then what does it do?

M

Encoded utf-8 string I would rename to encoded utf-8 bytes and make it return a read-only Santa bite. Because that way, if we actually do introduce utf-8 string, we can reserve the encoded utf-8 training, property name for them. Ok,.

A

So if you also remove encoded string until we have a need for it, because I don't as a just a writer I default to UT, fair, so I don't use in question. Yeah.

G

But basically the result of JavaScript in codec all right.

H

There are questions. One of these would be useful.

B

A

B

You have to string because, if spring in a coated string or the same thing, that's always the debugger scenario there anyway, keeping the encoder and exposing the encoder. Would let you do things like if you wanted to use a different free escape thing, depending on what your, what you're calling hub, yeah.

M

B

I think that there is still value in in exposing the encoder. Okay I mean I, don't care, but you can build API on top of it should be otherwise after your own. Thank.

M

You and I I can buy that argument. My the only excuse for me wanting to simplify it was to bring it more to make it more symmetric with what is, if you don't, that already has, but I.

M

Understand the context in which they built it, but it should.

D

A

A part of the addition of this property until there is a user request, guys I, don't have a custom use for right now. I thought moving well.

I

I mean the question is: if we remove the property, who can we get to the point record stuff wants it to be? If it is basically, you just wrap one pointer rather than where any two pointers, in which case it could be a strong cool.

M

Until unless we decide that we want to add this in the future, because there is a scenario for it now, I can't stop. Why.

E

Actually, don't believe that my.

M

E

To it makes it either it can be a struct or not I think we have guidelines that say: struct should be mutable and shouldn't be very large. It doesn't say: thanks have to be one pointer.

M

E

M

Is a problem, though, because some of these might be lazy, like encoded string, see.

J

I I don't agree with the lazy functionality. um I think that you could create three different and codings air instances. If you need three different versions and I think it could be immutable. So.

A

When you did lazily by what enable today on the construct rack, I encode.

M

Yeah, sorry, you.

J

You pass in whatever you want string car byte and then you know you can have the option then to encode to whatever value you want string. Car byte, for example, I, don't know, I mean one so say, for example, JSON encoding text because T you know generic T and then the T is actually in car byte. That's what you get out of it. That's it! You get one value out. You can pass in three different values string car byte, but you know why do we have to do the lazy git and keep the value?

J

Keep the encoder? You know around forever.

A

So what what doesn't? What do you mean by lazy, because I call.

J

It there's three different gifts here right for that string. You car byte. What.

A

J

Either you when you, when you call the static constructor or whatever your factory, myth that you're gonna add on you, have a choice of creating all three values up front and then not having to remember the encoder or you wait until the get method is called, which means you have to remember the encoder and then maybe the value semantics get kind of broken at that point. So.

A

On the constructor, I include all three or all two right now: I, don't do lazily based on property access. So it's not lazy. It is what you're suggesting right now to you. What.

J

I'm suggesting I'm thinking about it is that if we just narrow it down to one value, string, car byte, jason quoted text of t that he's gonna say what internally it's gonna encode. But then you will allow you know your three static factory methods and you're gonna convert to that um t version. Then you just do one accordion and it has various abilities.

B

That doesn't really make a lot of sense, because we're talking about text that the fact that we have bytes right now is an artifact. If we don't have char eight right and- and we don't want a generic- that, if you there are three values you can pass in and everything else throws.

J

So well, okay, it's well whether it's a generic or three different subclasses whatever, but I mean. I think that I think my question is: what is the scenario for changing the value out? I mean for like property names, for example. I know I'm gonna pass in a fight. You know utf-8 value and that's the only thing I care about I, don't want the string version or the car version to be created when I know the.

M

The scenario the scenario is when all of this is released and customers ask: why can't I just call Jason dot serialized and have a return of string like I want to serialize this object and return an actual system. Doctoring instance like we're. We know we're going to get that request. We have that API ready, yeah.

O

M

It works with utf-8 under the covers and then transcodes everything to stray in the end, I believe.

A

J

D

J

Don't want to import our encode reader for our decoder or in code three different things. When you call this factory method right, I mean I'll just be slow, but.

A

The thing is, though it is, it would be gassed radically way, so it doesn't matter. What is it.

J

Sometimes I mean, but maybe for values. It might not be just call the thing that takes the string instead of the pre encoding yeah.

M

This this would only be for things that you intend to cache. That's the only scenario for this right right.

J

But in either case I mean I have an object with you know, 50 properties on it, and you know that means we end up with a hundred extra things hanging around. It aren't used.

A

So I mean we could remove, we could just have utf-8 under the covers, but the reason why I don't want do it now, because this is not UT very specific. This is just this incorrect answer. It doesn't have any with encoding. This is why I do all three or two right now.

E

So I mean not that III I'm leaning toward like let's forget about usage utf-16, but I literally don't care if we want it to have kind of what some people were saying on the phone, we could have a setting that says: I want these encoding to be eager or these lazy.

E

Basically, you must parameter to the income method to the constructor and say I only want you f/8, eager or both eager and then, if you say only one eager, then yes, if you could keep pulling on utf-16 you're gonna get transcoded every single time and if you say both eager, then you know we stir both. But I would start with a very simple struct with one field transcodes and in the you know in the constructor, and it's done we it's like Louis.

M

Head so can we can we get agreement right here with all of us on the call right now that, if that design ends up not working out for any reason in a future version, we can just make it a class and take the break no.

E

If we, if it doesn't work in the future, we just.

E

We've never been basically saying.

F

E

Don't start ever encountered this time just basically either stores one utf8 already encoded payload or two payloads one utf-16 use.

B

A different encoding, meaning based on a different encoder, it's up to them to manage the dictionary themselves. We can.

E

B

After the fact and.

E

When you say in-crowd that you mean escaped yeah based on the name of the type, is JavaScript yeah, because we are talking about two different things: nice test text, encoding and.

J

E

When you want different escaping seer on your own, it's basically, this type is I'm. Using these writers read their psychie eyes, just like the asp.net should be so.

A

We just hope this down even more and just call you so you give it just a touch well,.

E

So then I would agree. Then. Basically, if we ever need to have this feature in the future, then we have a word but I think we don't have a word if we just make it this track. It's immutable Strack. Now here's.

J

E

In in the future, we have two fields or we eagerly add two fields. If you guys feel this is super important, so.

M

If we have renamed us I'm, sorry I I,.

L

Don't understand why you're pushing for it to be a struct, especially if it is going to be a static, read on most of the time and therefore you're not going to have a bunch of creation and recreation of the type that the class is just more extensible in the future, and it has no downside you can, you could argue yeah, that's true, I mean and structs just unless you have an explicit need for them.

L

They aren't passed efficiently by default and if we ever changed in the future, we're going to have to start passing with my Raffin in and everything else well,.

E

So I wouldn't say that a class has no negatives, it that's kind of a negative. It has all okay. If the algorithm is something that you know, we have a reason to have sure we should have it. Somebody.

I

Understand the over an argument, because I mean these things are mostly cached values, you know, understand, sharing them every single request, but if you're doing this you're doing it wrong so.

A

I would say it is possible that you would rub these on Aggies, because if you want custom escaping on values, that's different from what the writer provides. You would need these up.

M

P

M

Don't think we would suggest people do that as a matter. Of course, we would if we do to support that scenario. I would recommend a different way of doing up. Okay, HTML string wants to be a class as well.

E

What is their asp.net HTML? You code, it text its.

M

Html, it's an app well, it's an interface and an abstract base class. It's not abstract! It's okay, yeah unsealed,.

L

N

What, if depends if you're talking about older, core yeah and HTML string stores the content? You give it because it's a it's a gesture to say this. This is already encoded and we don't do. We don't do transcoding between different text encodings at that level. So.

M

You don't have to.

N

Yeah, we don't have. These concerns come on yeah.

M

It's the reason for its design is it's kind of a wart that traces itself back today, it's peanut NBC, two or three but yeah okay,.

A

So class was this truck I think you can revisit that offline I, don't know. Other questions are the way, so you have something some viable solution, one we already discussed but just to clarify. So just a coded text over ice then cold as faster the rider the rider the rider options, so it will always win and therefore we don't need that is already encoded method. On the equate text. Yeah.

M

That would be fine without and.

A

Then we decided this option constructor arguments and made them factory methods. So now it's not six constructors about three factory methods, static methods and I. Think you mentioned this already Levi is that it should be called yeah encoding, utf-8, my senators of span of bike ride and a binary and per now you I remove the string property because I don't see, I need for it as.

J

You put the private fields on here somewhere, I know it's an API review, but it's kind of hard to you know, discuss the pros and cons of a struck I. Don't.

A

Know if there's one.

J

Field or three fields or four there's.

A

Three theres a binary to the string there's an encoder today it might be limited by port expedition, but we would change that to just have one. That's right: yeah, the.

M

My comments about renaming that property was I, don't think we should have properties that have the name utf-8 string somewhere anywhere in their name and I.

A

M

Actually of type utf-8 string.

A

Does that help Steve yeah.

J

Like I, say, I mean originally we're talking about I, think having a string, a car and a byte fields that sounded like the way that we were doing it and not remember, and then coding people.

A

Not have a park field just be cool and that's what I have caught just raining. Byte for standard escape.

A

J

Know we've been crazy about you know, trying to minimize Alex and, and things like that. I know this is cash, but you know I've gotten a ton of feedback on code reviews that says: hey I, don't care if it's cash, you should still you know, make it fast. So I'm surprised that we're actually going down this road trip, our double or triple encoding.

A

Okay, that's for v1, it would just it would not have that it would just be a span of byte and there and be a would.

B

A

It will be by anybody return of the spam bite so type names. Do we want it to be just encoded string, just equal text skip string text value? What do you really landing on that? What's.

E

That, what's the name of the escaper javascript encoder.

A

Yeah and I I did avoid the term straining primarily because I've only been on so I made a text. This is why I came up with different tracks. Sure escape is more clear in that were supposed to do, but we.

E

Have messengers all encoding, so you see this is why I asked about the name of the encoder. It would be nice nice if then kind of names we'll put a little right and now they are not because this is called JavaScript in colder, and this is called Jason and covered in text. Oh I.

M

See what didn't I mean? Didn't you and Steve to help actually come up with those names when it was ported to Donna Corwin? Oh because the original name of that type was JavaScript string encoder and they caught changed before 100.

A

Started with this JavaScript sedusa yeah.

M

Yeah yeah Jason strings are a subset of JavaScript strings. Hence the name.

A

But it'll be more odd, because this type I would imagine now a lot of people use. It will be more out for this to be called JavaScript. You could echo a text and people pass them to the json writer.

G

Right exactly no, this.

A

Is why I think it's flying to make that discrepancy here, even though we.

N

Go for chaos and change everything to be JavaScript everything we.

M

Can we could also make a new type called JSON string encoder, so.

A

Right blendin intermixing corner, rather than using task and cord the expose that I mean.

M

It would literally behave identically to JavaScript encoder, like literally it would just be a wrapper around it. I.

A

Think, basically, encoded thanks this in court in our script and code, it's hot and.

M

Cold yeah, okay,.

A

So the way we have today is fine just enjoy.

B

A dozen encoders yeah.

A

Okay and excess pine resin string and your value yeah.

M

Texas pine has it represents text so.

A

Sort of this new, just a writer option that lets you provide a JavaScript encoder. We exposed via the seer Iser yeah. Presumably yes, and then you.

M

Know: okay, yeah, because what we would want is for frameworks like asp.net, which call into the serializer not necessarily into the jason writer directly, what, under certain certain circumstances, want to be able to change it. Okay,.

A

And make it would be for this implement I available, no.

M

No because it's possible for for text to have two different representations, but to mean the same thing.

A

N

Okay, the point is that it's complicated: if we don't need it like, don't add it yeah yeah we have it do we feel like it's needed for any real scenario or it's kind of an artifact of producing output I. It was basically, if somebody has it did my bar. Do it but I, don't even I, don't I.

A

Don't have one sorry.

M

I lost the last few seconds because my battery died. What's up, oh I was.

N

Just asking about I equatable like if the reason why not to do it is that it's complicated. Do we have scenarios where we want I equatable, or was it just suggestion.

N

M

Would be, it would be probably misleading, because what is it actually acquainting.

M

A

Since I have both this, you get 16 string and binary I do a referential equality of string. If that feels the sequence comparison on the technicals, that's what it would mean and.

M

I think that just happens to represent the same data under the covers that.

A

Data guar will be right if there's pipes, if the utf-8 bytes are equal. Regards of what ink were you use to get them that are true, I, always.

M

See and in my case I would have expected equality to mean that the the unescape representation is the same, not the estate representation. But this type is.

E

You know escaped tag, so I would say not that I propose that we do it, but we could basically say we just use the underlying equals implementations for the fields. I mean that seems to be effectively what I was doing. But yeah you mean, like reference equality on the by the way. Well, not battery, because we binary is just an implementation detail, but you.

J

E

Gonna have UT effects, string, suppose V yeah and it's gonna have some equals implementation. So we should just call it and the same thing for utf-16 string. Well, they they're.

A

E

A

Especially the deep equality on the escaped straight, we.

E

Could do this I, don't know, there's a good comment like you know, if we don't have a scenario that we shouldn't spend time on. It second thing makes me think like geez. This, this thing literally represents a string, it's kind of weird that you cannot compare them in the same way. Moreover, we're gonna have, you know equals that takes an object. What are you gonna do inside.

B

I

Should this be a start if it is a strong yeah, because framework design guidelines say to do so, and there are problems if you call object.

A

I equals and I would.

B

Say the equals issue exists in no matter what, whether it's a struct or a class, this already equals the text, an object, you need, we need. We need to decide what the.

F

Behavior of this method is.

E

Future, if you ever add this interface, you gonna have very wacky difference in behavior.

J

Because between.

E

Overload that should be.

J

Doing the same thing, so I guess yes,.

E

We can yeah, but it should just be the value based on them, post, yeah, so just definite string.

K

Equals on the escaped strain, yep and.

E

K

Means you also have to implement good house code all that good stuff.

M

Okay, whatever get so you need a you need good hash code as well, which means.

B

You're going to have to call in to Marvin.

B

C

M

If you're in box it'll be relatively easy because you actually, you can access Marvin api's.

I

I

Okay, just a last note that.

M

This proposal, API depends on JavaScript order being in box and I know, leave on what your own gang goes, that LP train and also the utf-8 spelling first, an.

A

Idea adding to the task encoder, so those those two API reviews that are links like approve them.

A

M

Was really not free mo yeah yeah.