Niels Lohmann
Niels Lohmann
Thanks a lot! Feels much better without a breaking change! Regarding the draft version - would it make sense to add an int parameter `draft` to the function and defaulting...
> Could technically even put `ubjson` as a version as they are so close and use it internally. You mean using BJData as parameter for UBJSON output/input?
Yes, what I meant: would this be something that could - in the long run - be exposed to the customer? As in: deprecating `to_bjdata` in favor of `to_ubjson` with...
Well, I thought of BJData to be a dialect of UBJSON, so I don't think replacing the UBJSON with those of BJData is a good idea.
> The change in endianness between UBJSON/BJData makes it feel like more than just a dialect to me so I'd fear labelling it as such (and having both use `to_ubjson`)...
Please see https://github.com/nlohmann/json/pull/4513/checks?check_run_id=35168472051 on how to sign off your commits.
> That unfortunately leaves `to_bjdata(j, true, true, nlohmann::json::bjdata_version_t::draft3)` looking rather verbose. ADL should allow you to write `to_bjdata(j, true, true, bjdata_version_t::draft3)`. Still not nice, but at least shorter. > 1....
Thanks!!
@nebkat Can you create another PR for the https://github.com/nlohmann/json/pull/4513#pullrequestreview-2535026794?
Welcome back! You need Astyle 3.1 to amalgamate.