Re: [RFC] Add json_encode indent parameter

Hi internals, If the rest also thinks the RFC is good to go, I suggest we start a vote coming week. As this is my first RFC, I'm not so sure how this typically gets kicked off, so I'd like to know what I need to do! Kind regards, Timon On 04-07-2022 00:01, Jakub Zelenka wrote:

Hi, On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 2:33 PM Timon de Groot <tdegroot96@gmail.com <mailto:tdegroot96@gmail.com>> wrote:

    Hi internals,

    Almost a year ago I first proposed my RFC draft to introduce a new
    json_encode parameter 'indent'. I have received a lot of feedback on
    the
    change, very insightful. The feedback can be boiled down to:
    - Accepting user input characters means you could create invalid JSON.
        Do we want that? Should it be complying with the spec[1]?
    - Preference for pure types, so int OR string, not both.

    So I think I made the change more complex than it should have been and
    considered the three options:
        1) Accept indent as an int, which will result in N spaces of indent
    per indentation level.
        2) Accept indent as a string, which will result in string N per
    indentation level.
        3) Accept indent as an int and indent_char as string, which will
    result in N * indent_char per indentation level.

    Option 1 seems very simple and feasible while not being confusing.
    Option 2 seems feasible, but somewhat more complex, because user input
    should be validated.
    Option 3 seems very flexible, but in my opinion very confusing at the
    same time, while I'm not sure there's even a use case for this level of
    flexibility.

    I have updated the pull request[2] and RFC[3] to be based on option 1,
    as I think this offers clear functionality and I feel like I can't
    really go wrong with the indent parameter as an int.

    Please let me know what your thoughts are and what needs to be done to
    get this RFC going forward!

 I think we can put this RFC to the vote. If the author is to busy I would like to start voting later this week. It would be a pity not to make it to feature freeze as it is quite straight forward and the implementation seems good as well so I guess we don't need to wait extra year. :) Cheers Jakub