Proper json unmarshaling in Go with the empty interface - json

Question

I'm currently learning golang and (probably as many others before me) I'm trying to properly understand the empty interface.
As an exercise, I'm reading a big json file produced by Postman and trying to access just one field (out of the many available).
Here is a simple representation of the json without the unnecessary fields I don't want to read (but that are still there):
{
"results": [
{
"times": [
1,
2,
3,
4
]
}
]
}
Since the json object is big, I opted out of unmarshaling it with a custom struct, and rather decided to use the empty interface interface{}
After some time, I managed to get some working code, but I'm quite sure this isn't the correct way of doing it.
byteValue, _ := ioutil.ReadAll(jsonFile)
var result map[string]interface{}
err = json.Unmarshal(byteValue, &result)
if err != nil {
log.Fatalln(err)
}
// ESPECIALLY UGLY
r := result["results"].([]interface{})
r1 := r[0].(map[string]interface{})
r2 := r1["times"].([]interface{})
times := make([]float64, len(r2))
for i := range r2 {
times[i] = r2[i].(float64)
}
Is there a better way to navigate through my json object without having to instantiate new variables every time i move deeper and deeper into the object?

Answer 1

Even if the JSON is large, you only have to define the fields you actually care about
You only need to use JSON tags if the keys aren't valid Go
identifiers (keys are idents in this case), even then you can sometimes avoid it by using a map[string]something
Unless you need the sub structs for some function or whatnot, you don't need to define them
Unless you need to reuse the type, you don't even have to define that, you can just define the struct at declaration time
Example:
package main
import (
"encoding/json"
"fmt"
)
const s = `
{
"results": [
{
"times": [1, 2, 3, 4]
}
]
}
`
func main() {
var t struct {
Results []struct {
Times []int
}
}
json.Unmarshal([]byte(s), &t)
fmt.Printf("%+v\n", t) // {Results:[{Times:[1 2 3 4]}]}
}

Answer 2

[...] trying to access just one field (out of the many available).
For this concrete use case I would use a library to query and access to a single value in a known path like:
https://github.com/jmespath/go-jmespath
In the other hand, if you're practicing how to access nested values in a JSON, I would recommend you to give a try to write a recursive function that follows a path in an unknown structure the same way (but simple) like go-jmespath does.
Ok, I challenged myself and spent an hour writing this. It works. Not sure about performance or bugs and it's really limited :)
https://play.golang.org/p/dlIsmG6Lk-p
package main
import (
"encoding/json"
"errors"
"fmt"
"strings"
)
func main() {
// I Just added a bit more of data to the structure to be able to test different paths
fileContent := []byte(`
{"results": [
{"times": [
1,
2,
3,
4
]},
{"times2": [
5,
6,
7,
8
]},
{"username": "rosadabril"},
{"age": 42},
{"location": [41.5933262, 1.8376757]}
],
"more_results": {
"nested_1": {
"nested_2":{
"foo": "bar"
}
}
}
}`)
var content map[string]interface{}
if err := json.Unmarshal(fileContent, &content); err != nil {
panic(err)
}
// some paths to test
valuePaths := []string{
"results.times",
"results.times2",
"results.username",
"results.age",
"results.doesnotexist",
"more_results.nested_1.nested_2.foo",
}
for _, p := range valuePaths {
breadcrumbs := strings.Split(p, ".")
value, err := search(breadcrumbs, content)
if err != nil {
fmt.Printf("\nerror searching '%s': %s\n", p, err)
continue
}
fmt.Printf("\nFOUND A VALUE IN: %s\n", p)
fmt.Printf("Type: %T\nValue: %#v\n", value, value)
}
}
// search is our fantastic recursive function! The idea is to search in the structure in a very basic way, for complex querying use jmespath
func search(breadcrumbs []string, content map[string]interface{}) (interface{}, error) {
// we should never hit this point, but better safe than sorry and we could incurr in an out of range error (check line 82)
if len(breadcrumbs) == 0 {
return nil, errors.New("ran out of breadcrumbs :'(")
}
// flag that indicates if we are at the end of our trip and whe should return the value without more checks
lastBreadcrumb := len(breadcrumbs) == 1
// current breadcrumb is always the first element.
currentBreadcrumb := breadcrumbs[0]
if value, found := content[currentBreadcrumb]; found {
if lastBreadcrumb {
return value, nil
}
// if the value is a map[string]interface{}, go down the rabbit hole, recursion!
if aMap, isAMap := value.(map[string]interface{}); isAMap {
// we are calling ourselves popping the first breadcrumb and passing the current map
return search(breadcrumbs[1:], aMap)
}
// if it's an array of interfaces the thing gets complicated :(
if anArray, isArray := value.([]interface{}); isArray {
for _, something := range anArray {
if aMap, isAMap := something.(map[string]interface{}); isAMap && len(breadcrumbs) > 1 {
if v, err := search(breadcrumbs[1:], aMap); err == nil {
return v, nil
}
}
}
}
}
return nil, errors.New("woops, nothing here")
}