use Perl

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Ovid (2709)

Ovid
(email not shown publicly)
http://publius-ovidius.livejournal.com/
AOL IM: ovidperl (Add Buddy, Send Message)

Stuff with the Perl Foundation. A couple of patches in the Perl core. A few CPAN modules. That about sums it up.

Journal of Ovid (2709)

Thursday December 20, 2007

05:28 AM

Test::JSON Now Failing

[ #35161 ]

My Test::JSON currently has 2 failures out of 106 test reports sent. One failure appears to be a messed up Perl installation, but the one I received yesterday is due to the JSON module being updated in a non-backwards compatible way. Apparently, there was a deprecation period of a whopping twelve days (going by the date of the first release of the new API to 2.0). I had not heard that there was going to be a new API and the author has made it clear that he won't support the old API.

Now I'll have to get a new release of Test::JSON out the door. Do I go through the trouble of allowing it to support the older JSON module in addition to the new API? I might. Frankly, I'm frustrated to be caught completely off guard by such a radical change in this important module, though I realize I'm not the first. But a twelve day deprecation period is ridiculous. And was this even at least announced anywhere? I might even look to switching to a different JSON module with an author who is less likely to pull the rug out from under me so quickly.

List all Journal entries

Test::JSON Now Failing More | Login | Reply

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to use the classic discussion system instead. If you login, you can remember this preference.

What would you choose? (Score:1)

by perigrin (3495)

I currently have failing tests with JSON::Any because JSON::XS decided to make a similar (not the same mind you but related) API change without a deprecation period *at all* (and in a point release no less!).

So really what would the alternative be?
- Re: (Score:2)
  
  by Ovid (2709)
  
  :(
  
  This is very frustrating. I guess I really can't recommend anything. I'd be tempted to say JSON::Syck [cpan.org] as Tatsuhiko's pretty sharp and is unlikely to break everyone's code without warning, but I see there are a number of serious bug reports and it doesn't appear to be widely used :/
  - Re: (Score:1)
    
    by perigrin (3495)
    
    Well I just fixed JSON::Any to work, and since I didn't have to change a single test I suspect I'm 100% backwards compatible to what you're running. Sooo ... might I suggest JSON::Any?
Yikes! Thanks for the headsup! (Score:1)

by renodino (6856)

Wow. I would have been kicking holes in walls and frothing at the mouth trying to debug if I hadn't seen your post, and wandered over to CPAN. "He couldn't possibly mean the 2 main methods in the module...could he ?"
Yep.
I think I've just discovered a new definition of arbitrary and capricious. But it appears the author has backed off for a bit...and will instead grace us with nagging warnings.
- Re: (Score:2)
  
  by Ovid (2709)
  
  Ah, that's a relief. I'll take the warnings over the breakage any day of the week :)
- Re: (Score:1)
  
  by Aristotle (5147)
  
  Heh, at first I read the word in the subject of the comment as “headsoup” – and considering the issue at hand, that would be apt enough…