There's no "might" about. This is exactly what happened in the early/beta days of JSON, per Douglas Crockford, creator of JSON:
> I removed comments from JSON because I saw people were using them to hold parsing directives, a practice which would have destroyed interoperability. I know that the lack of comments makes some people sad, but it shouldn't.
* https://web.archive.org/web/20190112173904/https://plus.goog...
* https://archive.today/2015.07.04-102718/https://plus.google....
And nobody stops them from continuing to use those meta-parsing semantics even if JSON-standards prohibits comments.
I think Crockford was wrong in his objection. It shouldn't have been his concern.
There's no "might" about. This is exactly what happened in the early/beta days of JSON, per Douglas Crockford, creator of JSON:
> I removed comments from JSON because I saw people were using them to hold parsing directives, a practice which would have destroyed interoperability. I know that the lack of comments makes some people sad, but it shouldn't.
* https://web.archive.org/web/20190112173904/https://plus.goog...
* https://archive.today/2015.07.04-102718/https://plus.google....
> […] absolutely necessary feature […]
It's so "absolutely necessary" that JSON has found hardly any success and is struggling to find a use case or a niche… /s
Or it seems that JSON works just fine without comments, especially as a data exchange format, which contradicts that claim that it is "necessary" (absolutely or otherwise).
Code that can't be annotated might as well be machine code. And guess what? Json largely is just that.
> It's so "absolutely necessary" that JSON has found hardly any success
I am almost 50, and since as early as I can remember, the worst technology always wins when there is some sort of standoff. That json succeeded doesn't mean anything, other than that it was the worst.
I'm old enough to understand why this is usually true... the best technology is usually more expensive, and economic forces favor the cheapest. Json though? Best I can figure is that imbeciles just got used to picking the worst, even when there was no expense tradeoff.
Snarking about how it won... I guess that means you think it was perfect on its first try? When the fuck has that ever happened with software?
You're just plainly wrong, and I don't know why or how you'd bother to be. Do you have a few hundred million in JSON Inc. shares about to IPO and somehow I missed it?
