I'm actually very tempted to set up https://douglascrockfordisnotyourdad.com and just make it A) a list of wonderful JSON parsers that supports comments followed by B) a list of open bug reports for parsers that do not yet support comments
OK fine; I couldn't be bothered to actually spend the $9.99 on the domain but here you go
https://douglascrockfordisnotyourdad.technomancy.us/
if you have a favorite or least-favorite json parser, let me know which list to add it to!
quick clarification about Douglas Crockford is Not Your Dad:
there is one situation in which it's acceptable to reject comments; if you want to validate incoming documents in a separate service from the one that's actually handling it, making the first parser accept a document but disagree on its meaning with the second one can cause trouble: https://bishopfox.com/blog/json-interoperability-vulnerabilities
there are no problems if either a) one of the parsers rejects comments altogether or b) the two parsers agree about what constitutes a comment (the JS spec is unambiguous about comments, but it's possible some parser authors might not read it?)
I still believe rejecting comments should be opt-in rather than opt-out, but I've added a footnote: https://douglascrockfordisnotyourdad.technomancy.us/#bad-things
@technomancy I just put
```
{
"comment1": "this is not actually the event id, its the corpotron9000 upload id",
"eventId": 752572129,
...
}
```
Usually works fine. Would be nice if comments support was more widespread I guess
