What to use in the face of deprecation of the scala.util.parsing.json._ package?
How to solve Scala Problem?
I have warning by JSON usage in my project:
Object JSON in package json is depricated. This object will be
removed.
import scala.util.parsing.json._
JSON.parseRaw("[{'a':'b'},{'c':'d'}]")
json scala
add a comment |
How to solve Scala Problem?
I have warning by JSON usage in my project:
Object JSON in package json is depricated. This object will be
removed.
import scala.util.parsing.json._
JSON.parseRaw("[{'a':'b'},{'c':'d'}]")
json scala
add a comment |
How to solve Scala Problem?
I have warning by JSON usage in my project:
Object JSON in package json is depricated. This object will be
removed.
import scala.util.parsing.json._
JSON.parseRaw("[{'a':'b'},{'c':'d'}]")
json scala
How to solve Scala Problem?
I have warning by JSON usage in my project:
Object JSON in package json is depricated. This object will be
removed.
import scala.util.parsing.json._
JSON.parseRaw("[{'a':'b'},{'c':'d'}]")
json scala
json scala
edited May 10 '15 at 22:15
toniedzwiedz
13k85697
13k85697
asked Apr 25 '15 at 16:08
BeachBirdBeachBird
5612
5612
add a comment |
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
Usually, this means a piece of functionality has been superseded by another implementation the use of which is preferred over the old one and a question like this simply means the OP is too lazy to google the docs. This is especially true in case of libraries in the Java language, which treats backward compatibility very seriously (to the point it becomes a pain for some). The Scala ecosystem is not so strict in this regard and upgrading to a newer version of the language means you can get a different API or even binary incompabilities. See also Scala: binary incompatibility between releases. This is not a comment against Scala. There are good reasons these incompatibilities exist.
However, I must admit that the documentation for scala.util.parsing.json
does not contain any information regarding the recommended replacement for this functionality whatsoever. It took me quite a while to dig up something that just barely resembles a clear statement of what the recommended replacement is.
There seems to have been a lot of discussion in the community about the point and repercussions of this deprecation. I recommend reading this thread in the scala-users group if you're interested.
The most quoted reasons for this deprecation seem to be around poor performance and thread safety.
The deprecation was done as part of this Jira issue and the use of different parsers is recommended in the closing comment of this related task that was not completed due to the deprecation.
Alternatives include:
- play-json
- spray-json
- argonaut
- jackson
rapture-json (which allows you to choose between different implementations)
To answer your question. This is a warning, your code should not break until this object is actually removed. However, if new bugs are found in this functionality, they most likely aren't going to be fixed. Your code can also break if you upgrade to a newer version of Scala that actually has those packages removed (Version 2.11.0 and above, according to the documentation)
add a comment |
The answer previously provided by @toniedzwiedz is very complete and describe the whole story around the question.
I just had the same issue using Scala 2.11
and I solved adding the dependencies which are in this repository.
In particular, for Scala 2.11
is:
<dependency>
<groupId>org.scala-lang.modules</groupId>
<artifactId>scala-parser-combinators_2.11</artifactId>
<version>1.1.0</version>
</dependency>
Then you will not have the warning.
add a comment |
Also considere using Lift JSON as an alternative
https://github.com/lift/lift/tree/master/framework/lift-base/lift-json/
add a comment |
The JSON parser in the Scala standard library is deprecated. You should pick one of more robust third-party libraries like Jackson, Play-Json, json4s, etc.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f29867579%2fwhat-to-use-in-the-face-of-deprecation-of-the-scala-util-parsing-json-package%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Usually, this means a piece of functionality has been superseded by another implementation the use of which is preferred over the old one and a question like this simply means the OP is too lazy to google the docs. This is especially true in case of libraries in the Java language, which treats backward compatibility very seriously (to the point it becomes a pain for some). The Scala ecosystem is not so strict in this regard and upgrading to a newer version of the language means you can get a different API or even binary incompabilities. See also Scala: binary incompatibility between releases. This is not a comment against Scala. There are good reasons these incompatibilities exist.
However, I must admit that the documentation for scala.util.parsing.json
does not contain any information regarding the recommended replacement for this functionality whatsoever. It took me quite a while to dig up something that just barely resembles a clear statement of what the recommended replacement is.
There seems to have been a lot of discussion in the community about the point and repercussions of this deprecation. I recommend reading this thread in the scala-users group if you're interested.
The most quoted reasons for this deprecation seem to be around poor performance and thread safety.
The deprecation was done as part of this Jira issue and the use of different parsers is recommended in the closing comment of this related task that was not completed due to the deprecation.
Alternatives include:
- play-json
- spray-json
- argonaut
- jackson
rapture-json (which allows you to choose between different implementations)
To answer your question. This is a warning, your code should not break until this object is actually removed. However, if new bugs are found in this functionality, they most likely aren't going to be fixed. Your code can also break if you upgrade to a newer version of Scala that actually has those packages removed (Version 2.11.0 and above, according to the documentation)
add a comment |
Usually, this means a piece of functionality has been superseded by another implementation the use of which is preferred over the old one and a question like this simply means the OP is too lazy to google the docs. This is especially true in case of libraries in the Java language, which treats backward compatibility very seriously (to the point it becomes a pain for some). The Scala ecosystem is not so strict in this regard and upgrading to a newer version of the language means you can get a different API or even binary incompabilities. See also Scala: binary incompatibility between releases. This is not a comment against Scala. There are good reasons these incompatibilities exist.
However, I must admit that the documentation for scala.util.parsing.json
does not contain any information regarding the recommended replacement for this functionality whatsoever. It took me quite a while to dig up something that just barely resembles a clear statement of what the recommended replacement is.
There seems to have been a lot of discussion in the community about the point and repercussions of this deprecation. I recommend reading this thread in the scala-users group if you're interested.
The most quoted reasons for this deprecation seem to be around poor performance and thread safety.
The deprecation was done as part of this Jira issue and the use of different parsers is recommended in the closing comment of this related task that was not completed due to the deprecation.
Alternatives include:
- play-json
- spray-json
- argonaut
- jackson
rapture-json (which allows you to choose between different implementations)
To answer your question. This is a warning, your code should not break until this object is actually removed. However, if new bugs are found in this functionality, they most likely aren't going to be fixed. Your code can also break if you upgrade to a newer version of Scala that actually has those packages removed (Version 2.11.0 and above, according to the documentation)
add a comment |
Usually, this means a piece of functionality has been superseded by another implementation the use of which is preferred over the old one and a question like this simply means the OP is too lazy to google the docs. This is especially true in case of libraries in the Java language, which treats backward compatibility very seriously (to the point it becomes a pain for some). The Scala ecosystem is not so strict in this regard and upgrading to a newer version of the language means you can get a different API or even binary incompabilities. See also Scala: binary incompatibility between releases. This is not a comment against Scala. There are good reasons these incompatibilities exist.
However, I must admit that the documentation for scala.util.parsing.json
does not contain any information regarding the recommended replacement for this functionality whatsoever. It took me quite a while to dig up something that just barely resembles a clear statement of what the recommended replacement is.
There seems to have been a lot of discussion in the community about the point and repercussions of this deprecation. I recommend reading this thread in the scala-users group if you're interested.
The most quoted reasons for this deprecation seem to be around poor performance and thread safety.
The deprecation was done as part of this Jira issue and the use of different parsers is recommended in the closing comment of this related task that was not completed due to the deprecation.
Alternatives include:
- play-json
- spray-json
- argonaut
- jackson
rapture-json (which allows you to choose between different implementations)
To answer your question. This is a warning, your code should not break until this object is actually removed. However, if new bugs are found in this functionality, they most likely aren't going to be fixed. Your code can also break if you upgrade to a newer version of Scala that actually has those packages removed (Version 2.11.0 and above, according to the documentation)
Usually, this means a piece of functionality has been superseded by another implementation the use of which is preferred over the old one and a question like this simply means the OP is too lazy to google the docs. This is especially true in case of libraries in the Java language, which treats backward compatibility very seriously (to the point it becomes a pain for some). The Scala ecosystem is not so strict in this regard and upgrading to a newer version of the language means you can get a different API or even binary incompabilities. See also Scala: binary incompatibility between releases. This is not a comment against Scala. There are good reasons these incompatibilities exist.
However, I must admit that the documentation for scala.util.parsing.json
does not contain any information regarding the recommended replacement for this functionality whatsoever. It took me quite a while to dig up something that just barely resembles a clear statement of what the recommended replacement is.
There seems to have been a lot of discussion in the community about the point and repercussions of this deprecation. I recommend reading this thread in the scala-users group if you're interested.
The most quoted reasons for this deprecation seem to be around poor performance and thread safety.
The deprecation was done as part of this Jira issue and the use of different parsers is recommended in the closing comment of this related task that was not completed due to the deprecation.
Alternatives include:
- play-json
- spray-json
- argonaut
- jackson
rapture-json (which allows you to choose between different implementations)
To answer your question. This is a warning, your code should not break until this object is actually removed. However, if new bugs are found in this functionality, they most likely aren't going to be fixed. Your code can also break if you upgrade to a newer version of Scala that actually has those packages removed (Version 2.11.0 and above, according to the documentation)
edited May 23 '17 at 12:18
Community♦
11
11
answered Apr 25 '15 at 16:40
toniedzwiedztoniedzwiedz
13k85697
13k85697
add a comment |
add a comment |
The answer previously provided by @toniedzwiedz is very complete and describe the whole story around the question.
I just had the same issue using Scala 2.11
and I solved adding the dependencies which are in this repository.
In particular, for Scala 2.11
is:
<dependency>
<groupId>org.scala-lang.modules</groupId>
<artifactId>scala-parser-combinators_2.11</artifactId>
<version>1.1.0</version>
</dependency>
Then you will not have the warning.
add a comment |
The answer previously provided by @toniedzwiedz is very complete and describe the whole story around the question.
I just had the same issue using Scala 2.11
and I solved adding the dependencies which are in this repository.
In particular, for Scala 2.11
is:
<dependency>
<groupId>org.scala-lang.modules</groupId>
<artifactId>scala-parser-combinators_2.11</artifactId>
<version>1.1.0</version>
</dependency>
Then you will not have the warning.
add a comment |
The answer previously provided by @toniedzwiedz is very complete and describe the whole story around the question.
I just had the same issue using Scala 2.11
and I solved adding the dependencies which are in this repository.
In particular, for Scala 2.11
is:
<dependency>
<groupId>org.scala-lang.modules</groupId>
<artifactId>scala-parser-combinators_2.11</artifactId>
<version>1.1.0</version>
</dependency>
Then you will not have the warning.
The answer previously provided by @toniedzwiedz is very complete and describe the whole story around the question.
I just had the same issue using Scala 2.11
and I solved adding the dependencies which are in this repository.
In particular, for Scala 2.11
is:
<dependency>
<groupId>org.scala-lang.modules</groupId>
<artifactId>scala-parser-combinators_2.11</artifactId>
<version>1.1.0</version>
</dependency>
Then you will not have the warning.
answered May 24 '18 at 21:17
dbustospdbustosp
1,310928
1,310928
add a comment |
add a comment |
Also considere using Lift JSON as an alternative
https://github.com/lift/lift/tree/master/framework/lift-base/lift-json/
add a comment |
Also considere using Lift JSON as an alternative
https://github.com/lift/lift/tree/master/framework/lift-base/lift-json/
add a comment |
Also considere using Lift JSON as an alternative
https://github.com/lift/lift/tree/master/framework/lift-base/lift-json/
Also considere using Lift JSON as an alternative
https://github.com/lift/lift/tree/master/framework/lift-base/lift-json/
answered May 1 '15 at 12:33
Carlos SaltosCarlos Saltos
15117
15117
add a comment |
add a comment |
The JSON parser in the Scala standard library is deprecated. You should pick one of more robust third-party libraries like Jackson, Play-Json, json4s, etc.
add a comment |
The JSON parser in the Scala standard library is deprecated. You should pick one of more robust third-party libraries like Jackson, Play-Json, json4s, etc.
add a comment |
The JSON parser in the Scala standard library is deprecated. You should pick one of more robust third-party libraries like Jackson, Play-Json, json4s, etc.
The JSON parser in the Scala standard library is deprecated. You should pick one of more robust third-party libraries like Jackson, Play-Json, json4s, etc.
answered Apr 25 '15 at 16:40
RyanRyan
6,59352139
6,59352139
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f29867579%2fwhat-to-use-in-the-face-of-deprecation-of-the-scala-util-parsing-json-package%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown