Re: Maintaining implementations of similar utility functions like json-fetch

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hey,

Jelle Licht <address@hidden> skribis:

> I basically added the robust features of `json-fetch*' to the exported
> `json-fetch'
> instead, and all existing functionality seems to work out as far as I can
> see.

So are you saying that we can get rid of ‘json-fetch*’?

> I did notice that I now produce hash-tables by default, and some of the
> existing usages of `json-fetch*' expect an alist instead. What would be a
> guile-
> appropriate way of dealing with this? I currently have multiple
> `(hash-table->alist (json-fetch <...>))' littered in my patch which seems
> suboptimal,
> but always converting the parsed json into an alist seems like it might
> also not be
> what we want.

Why insist on having an alist?  Perhaps you can just stick to hash
tables?   :-)

Ludo’.