I'm trying to access the roomName, but so far I am unable. I don't get how to get past the barriar of the info.[long ID with dashes].roomName.
At most I can get back the object of the long id or undefined.
I have tried info[0].roomName. Trying to get the first object in the info and then go on from there. The long id number is also in list.id, I don't know if that can help.
I would have set the info as an array like list is, but this is not my JSON, only one that I am working with.
{
"list":[ IGNORE, can access code here ],
"info":{
"e5eb1ccf-bd45-4d01-8e2a":{
"id":"e5eb1ccf-bd45-4d01-8e2a",
"name":"Lucy",
"roomName":"Arts" <<I need to get to this.
}
}
}
I hope this makes sense, first post and this is just a boiled down version of what I have. Putting in the id number in the info.e5eb1ccf-bd45-4d01-8e2a.roomName breaks after the first -
Once you've parsed the JSON (assuming you even have JSON*) and you have an object, you'd use brackets notation:
var room = theObject.info["e5eb1ccf-bd45-4d01-8e2a"].roomName;
console.log(room); // Arts
* Remember, JSON is a textual notation for data exchange. (More here.) If you're dealing with JavaScript source code, and not dealing with a string, you're not dealing with JSON.
Related
We receive a JSON object from network along with a hash value of the object. In order to verify the hash we need to turn that JSON into a string and then make a hash out of it while preserving the order of the elements in the way they are in the JSON.
Say we have:
[
{"site1":
{"url":"https://this.is.site.com/",
"logoutURL":"",
"loadStart":[],
"loadStop":[{"someMore":"smthelse"}],
"there's_more": ... }
},
{"site2":
....
}
]
The Android app is able to get same hash value, and while debugging it we fed same simple string into both algorithms and were able to get out same hash out of it.
The difference that is there happens because of the fact that dictionaries are unordered structure.
While debugging we see that just before feeding a string into a hash algorithm, the string looks like the original JSON, just without the indentations, which means it preserves the order of items in it (on Android that is):
[{"site1":{"url":"https://this.is.site.com/", ...
While doing this with many approaches by now I'm not able to achieve the same: string that I get is different in order and therefore results in a different hash. Is there a way to achieve this?
UPDATE
It appears the problem is slightly different - thanks to #Rob Napier's answer below: I need a hash of only a part of incoming string (that has JSON in it), which means for getting that part I need to first parse it into JSON or struct, and after that - while getting the string value of it - the order of items is lost.
Using JSONSerialization and JSONDecoder (which uses JSONSerialization), it's not possible to reproduce the input data. But this isn't needed. What you're receiving is a string in the first place (as an NSData). Just don't get rid of it. You can parse the data into JSON without throwing away the data.
It is possible to create JSON parsers from scratch in Swift that maintain round-trip support (I have a sketch of such a thing at RNJSON). JSON isn't really that hard to parse. But what you're describing is a hash of "the thing you received." Not a hash of "the re-serialized JSON."
I am building a REST API which creates a resource. The resource has only one attribute which is a rather long and unique string. I am planning to send this data to the API as JSON. I see two choices for modeling the data as JSON
A primitive JSON String data type
A JSON object with one String attribute.
Both the options work.
Which of these two options is preferred for this context? And why?
Basic Answer for Returning
I would personally use option 2, which is: `A JSON object with one String attribute.'
Also, in terms of design: I prefer to return an object, that has a key/value. The key is also a name that provides context as to what has been returned.
Returning just a string, basically a "" or {""} lacks that context ( the name of the returned variable.
Debate: Are primitive Strings Json Objects?
There seems to be also some confusion as to if a String by itself is a valid JSON document.
This confusion and debate, are quite evident in the following posts where various technical specs are mentioned: Is a primitive type considered JSON?
The only thing for sure is that a JSON object with a key-value pair is definitely valid!
As to a string by itself.. I'm not sure ( requires more reading).
Update: Answer In terms of creating/updating an entity (Post/Put)
In the specific case above, relating to such a large string that "runs into a few kilobytes"... my feeling is that this would be included within the request body.
In the specific context of sending data, I would actually be comfortable with using either 1 or 2. Additionally, 1 seems more optimized ( if your frameworks support it), since the context about what the data is, is related to the rest API method.
However, if in the future you need to add one more parameter, you will have to use a JSON entity with more than one key.
I am trying to find the syntax error in the JSON data since an hour!
Unable to attach the full code, hence uploading in GoogleDocs
Json.data
JSON is supposed to represent a single JavaScript Object, yet what you linked to includes two objects : the first object ends at line 20 and the parser would expect to reach the end of the file here, yet it finds a comma and some other data.
You might want to include these multiple objects in an array or another wrapper object.
Additionnaly, you have an extra comma after your "VPC" object, which might upset some parsers.
I got an anonymous array which I want to deserialize, here the example of the first array object
[
{ "time":"08:55:54",
"date":"2016-05-27",
"timestamp":1464332154807,
"level":3,
"message":"registerResourcePath ('', '/sap/bc/ui5_ui5/ui2/ushell/resources/')",
"details":"","component":"sap.ui.ModuleSystem"},
{"time":"08:55:54","date":"2016-05-27","timestamp":1464332154808,"level":3,"message":"URL prefixes set to:","details":"","component":"sap.ui.ModuleSystem"},
{"time":"08:55:54","date":"2016-05-27","timestamp":1464332154808,"level":3,"message":" (default) : /sap/bc/ui5_ui5/ui2/ushell/resources/","details":"","component":"sap.ui.ModuleSystem"}
]
I tried deserializing using CL_TREX_JSON_SERIALIZER, but it is corrupt and does not work with my JSON, here is why
Then I tried /UI2/CL_JSON, but it needs a "structure" that perfectly fits the object given by the JSON Object. "Structure" means in my case an internal table of objects with the attributes time, date, timestamp, level, messageanddetails. And there was the problem: it does not properly handle references and uses class description to describe the field assigned to the field-symbol. Since I can not have a list of objects but only a list of references to objects that solution also doesn't works.
As a third attempt I tried with the CALL TRANSFORMATION as described by Horst Keller, but with this method I was not able to read in an anonymous array, and here is why
My major points:
I do not want to change the JSON, since that is what I get from sap.ui.log
I prefere to use built-in functionality and not a thirdparty framework
Your problem comes out not from the anonymity of array, but from the awkwardness of SAP JSON (De)serializer, which doesn't respect double quotes, which enclose JSON attributes. The issue is thoroughly described in this answer.
If you don't want to change your JSON on-the-fly, the only way you have is to change CL_TREX_JSON_DESERIALIZER class like this.
/UI5/CL_JSON_PARSER parses JSONs with unknown format.
Note that it's got "for internal use" written on it so many times that you probably should take it seriously and clone its code to fixate it.
I have questions about JSON returning from the server using the Microsoft oData API.
Cannot figure it out.
Query1:
http://localhost:63717/odata/City(1)
Fiddler returns the raw data below.
Everything is in its own brackets.
{
"odata.metadata":"http://localhost:63717/odata/$metadata#City/#Element","CityID":1,"CityName":"Minnetonka","CityAddr1":null,"CityAddr2":null,"CityCity":null,"CityState":null,"CityZip":null,"CityPhone":null,"CityFAX":null,"CityExtent":"-93.53,44.88,-93.39,44.93","CityHeaderImage":null
}
Query2:
http://localhost:63717/odata/City?$filter=CityName eq 'Minnetonka'
Fiddler returns the raw data below.
Data is in two sets of bracketed data
{
"odata.metadata":"http://localhost:63717/odata/$metadata#City","value":[
{
"CityID":1,"CityName":"Minnetonka","CityAddr1":null,"CityAddr2":null,"CityCity":null,"CityState":null,"CityZip":null,"CityPhone":null,"CityFAX":null,"CityExtent":"-93.53,44.88,-93.39,44.93","CityHeaderImage":null
}
]
}
What do I have to do to format my JSON coming back for $filters in the oData request?
That odata.metadata is killing me in Query2.
Please explain what I am doing wrong.
In the first example, you have just one City element (denoted by City(1) in the request and #City/#Element in the result path).
In the second example, the value property in result is showing an array of City types (a listing of one or more objects). [ ... ] denotes an array in JavaScript. For a $filter type query, this is what I would expect. You can also see that the response path is less specific (#City instead of #City/#Element).
The path shown in the odata.metadata property value describes the structure of the element being returned, as I showed two examples above. The format of the return data will change depending on how you request it.
If you're having trouble parsing the JSON returned, consider using a library to do the heavy lifting for you. For example:
datajs
JayData
Breeze.js
[Source]
You are not doing anything wrong, the two formats actually represent two different forms of result.
The first you are requesting a single item as you are specifying the key for the entity.
In the second you are potentially asking for a list of entities. The Odata.Metadata is separate in this response otherwise it would be repeated for every item returned and would be a waste in terms of content length.
Because of the way that you are addressing the entity.
With //localhost:63717/odata/City(1) you are addressing one entity ("/entityset/key"). You will always return back one City (if one exists). There is no need for it to return an array because it will never return more than one.
With //localhost:63717/odata/City you are addressing a collection of entities ("/entityset"). 0 to n City entities could be returned, hence the need for a collection.