alisdair sullivan

the provider always overrides it? there's no opportunity to define your own via the env?

maybe just one json module that has both jsx and jiffy as dependencies? i'm mostly interested in there being a common interface that returns functionally the same results for encode...

oh, as for name. i have this we can use. it's just some methods that work on/with json as returned by jsx right now, but if we unify interfaces it'll...

or, thinking about it as i eat lunch, maybe we just want to restrict input to maps only for objects and if people want {[{...},..]} or [{...},..] they can use...

you can use the `dirty_strings` option to not escape strings this looks like maybe a bug in the string escaping however. i will need to take a closer look

i like the look of this but i have a million questions: what's the `path` option for? is it a way to selectively ignore parts of the stream? is the...

ah i see now. i like your interface in general but `RootObj` won't really work without first parsing the entire json body. still, i really like the idea of selecting...

i half started working on an interface like: ``` erlang handle_item(Path, Item, State) -> ... ``` where `Path` would be something like `[, 0, ]` as in: ``` js {...

your point about difficulty in matching at the end of the `Path` is a good one. ``` erlang handle_item([, 0], _, _) -> ... handle_item([, 0, ], _, _) ->...

that's not the chunk count, it's an arbitrary term returned (optionally) as in emit. i just used it to track books processed