undefined | Better HN

0 pointsmunchler1y ago0 comments

> the directly-equivalent JSON

    [["field1","field2","fieldN"],
     ["value (0,0)","value (0,1)","value (0,n)"],
     ["value (1,0)","value (1,1)","value (1,n)"],
     ["value (2,0)","value (2,1)","value (2,n)"]]

I think it's a big stretch to use that JSON for comparison. In practice, one is much more likely to see this:

    [
      {
        "field1": "value (0,0)",
        "field2": "value (0,1)",
        "fieldN": "value (0,n)"
      },
      {
        "field1": "value (1,0)",
        "field2": "value (1,1)",
        "fieldN": "value (1,n)"
      },
      {
        "field1": "value (2,0)",
        "field2": "value (2,1)",
        "fieldN": "value (2,n)"
      }
    ]

0 comments

hajile1y ago

While most people would prefer the second version, the first version is also valid JSON and will definitely see use when you want/need JSON but want to reduce data over the wire though you'd probably still see a wrapper object like:

    {
      headers: ["field1","field2","fieldN"],
      values: [["value (0,0)","value (0,1)","value (0,n)"],
       ["value (1,0)","value (1,1)","value (1,n)"],
       ["value (2,0)","value (2,1)","value (2,n)"]]
    }

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse