JsonSerializerOptions.Web for JsonSerializerOptions

[I-SER-I]

Close #92181

[ghost]

Note regarding the new-api-needs-documentation label:

This serves as a reminder for when your PR is modifying a ref *.cs file and adding/modifying public APIs, please make sure the API implementation in the src *.cs file is documented with triple slash comments, so the PR reviewers can sign off that change.

[ghost]

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-text-json, @gregsdennis
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Issue Details

---

null

Author:	I-SER-I
Assignees:	-
Labels:	area-System.Text.Json, new-api-needs-documentation
Milestone:	-

[I-SER-I]

May i change all statement in dontent/runtime new JsonSerializerOptions(JsonSerializerDefaults.Web) to JsonSerializerOptions.Web?

[stephentoub]

May i change all statement in dontent/runtime new JsonSerializerOptions(JsonSerializerDefaults.Web) to JsonSerializerOptions.Web?

Yes, where possible, but most of these cases would involve removing the static readonly field entirely and just changing call sites to use the new property directly.

[eiriktsarpalis]

This test is checking the behavior of the constructor and shouldn't be changed. Consider adding a separate test for the singleton instead.

[eiriktsarpalis]

May i change all statement in dontent/runtime new JsonSerializerOptions(JsonSerializerDefaults.Web) to JsonSerializerOptions.Web?

It depends. Unit tests explicitly there to validate the behavior of the constructor shouldn't be changed, whereas it would be beneficial to update product code that defines its own singletons in lieu of a centrally defined one.

[eiriktsarpalis]

@I-SER-I would it be possible to address the feedback when possible? Thanks!