Re: [Json] JSON Schema Language: extensibility and unspecified properties

[Richard Gibson <[e-mail]>]

Exactly. binary64 is an obvious option since it is the source of the
bounds, but int64 is equally capable of fulfilling the role. Just like int8
imposes constraints on a value without requiring any particular
machine-local treatment or representation (which should remain irrelevant
to the schema language itself), so too would int53.

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 7:54 AM Pete Cordell <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 20/08/2019 04:26, Ulysse Carion wrote:
> >> An "int53" type or other means of requiring that a JSON number have
> zero fractional part and magnitude no greater than 2^53.
> >
> > Ah -- in that case, I think it fails the other part of the criterion I
> > put forward: having "a clear mapping to programming languages in
> > widespread use today." In case the language is unclear, my thinking
> > was that both (1) and (2) need to be satisfied for something to be
> > included in the spec.
> >
> > At least on my view, int53's correspondence is unclear -- should it be
> > a double/f64, or a long/int64_t, with a runtime check to make sure
> > it's in-bounds? That's not very idiomatic. Better, in my view, to
> > stick to uncontroversial things?
>
> IMO, the schema should be about representing what the protocol needs
> rather than how it is represented on a target machine.
>
> An implementation may choose to store an int8 in a 32-bit integer. As
> long as it does suitable bounds checking at the appropriate points
> nothing outside the machine need know that it has chosen to do that.
>
> There may be cases where there is a need for something that is larger
> than int32 but more inter-operable than int64. int53 satisfies that need
> in many cases.
>
> Mapping it to either double/f64 or long/int64_t is a local
> implementation choice.
>
> Pete.
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Pete Cordell
> Codalogic Ltd
> C++ tools for C++ programmers, http://codalogic.com
> Read & write XML in C++, http://www.xml2cpp.com
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>