In Jackson, I am using annotation #JsonTypeInfo to include polymorphism support.
If, I do not want to go with annotation based approach, I can use global default typing or override the type information handling module.
I have tried global type information but it is emitting type information for all non final type.
What I need ,
I want to include type information only for polymorphic type.
I want to change default format of type info (to key-value pair)
Is it possible to achieve above two points just by twitting global configuration?
If not, what extension point should I used used to customize type-information module ?
I have read JacksonAnnotationIntrospector is the class which deals with type info.
Should I customize it to achieve above mentioned two points?
Help with Example will be well and good.
You can use Jackson's DefaultTypeResolverBuilder for this purpose. Extend this class and override the useForType method appropriately. Here is an example that adds type information only for the classes belonging to the test.jackson package (and sub-packages):
import com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.JavaType;
import com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.ObjectMapper.DefaultTypeResolverBuilder;
import com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.ObjectMapper.DefaultTyping;
public class CustomTypeResolverBuilder extends DefaultTypeResolverBuilder
{
public CustomTypeResolverBuilder()
{
super(DefaultTyping.NON_FINAL);
}
#Override
public boolean useForType(JavaType t)
{
if (t.getRawClass().getName().startsWith("test.jackson")) {
return true;
}
return false;
}
}
Now, consider that you have Foo.java in test.jackson package and Bar.java in org.myorg package, each containing an int variable called "integer" and a String variable called "string".
You can serialize objects of these two classes this way:
ObjectMapper objectMapper = new ObjectMapper();
TypeResolverBuilder<?> typeResolver = new CustomTypeResolverBuilder();
typeResolver.init(JsonTypeInfo.Id.CLASS, null);
typeResolver.inclusion(JsonTypeInfo.As.PROPERTY);
typeResolver.typeProperty("#CLASS");
objectMapper.setDefaultTyping(typeResolver);
Foo foo = new Foo(10, "Foo");
Bar bar = new Bar(20, "Bar");
System.out.println(objectMapper.writeValueAsString(foo));
System.out.println(objectMapper.writeValueAsString(bar));
The corresponding output will be:
{"#CLASS":"test.jackson.Foo","integer":10,"string":"Foo"}
{"integer":20,"string":"Bar"}
You can also customize the name of the attribute that represents the type ("#CLASS" in the above example). Hope this helps!
You can use the Moonwlker library.
With it, you can create an ObjectMapper like this:
ObjectMapper objectMapper = new ObjectMapper();
MoonwlkerModule module =
MoonwlkerModule.builder()
.fromProperty("#CLASS").toSubclassesOf(Animal.class)
.build();
objectMapper.registerModule(module);
And then use that mapper to (de)serialize. The Moonwlker website contains more details and configuration options.
Related
I've searched and found Jackson ObjectMapper throwing NullPointerException even with NON_NULL, but I don't have control of the class to change my setter.
I have am being given
{... "fieldNames": null,...}
and am supposed to deserialize it to
Collection<String> fieldNames
I don't have control of the class or the json I'm getting.
Is there some setting I can use to handle for this? I've looked at DeserializationFeature, but could not find it
You can use mix-ins when you don't control the class you are deserializing. You don't mention the name of the class containing Collection<String> fieldNames so lets assume it's called Fields. Then create a new class:
class FieldsMixin {
#JsonSetter(nulls = Nulls.SKIP)
Collection<String> fieldNames;
}
and add the mixin class to your ObjectMapper associating it with the original unmodified class:
mapper.addMixIn(Fields.class, FieldsMixin.class);
This is a new feature in Jackson 2.9 and as you guess it will skip calling a setter method or otherwise set a field if the value in JSON is null. Documentation
I need to add new property to an object, when serializing to JSON. The value for the property is calculated on runtime and does not exist in the object. Also the same object can be used for creation of different JSON with different set ot fields (kind of having a base class with subclasses, but I don't want to create ones just for JSON generation).
What is the best way of doing that, which doesn't involve creation of custom serializer class, which will take care of serializing of whole set of object's fields? Or may be it is possible to inherit some "basic" serializer, and simply take it's output and add new field to it somehow?
I learned about mixins, and looks like it is possible to rename/hide some fields, however it seems not be possible to add an extra one.
Can you not just add a method in value class? Note that it does not have to be either public, or use getter naming convention; you could do something like:
public class MyStuff {
// ... the usual fields, getters and/or setters
#JsonProperty("sum") // or whatever name you need in JSON
private int calculateSumForJSON() {
return 42; // calculate somehow
}
}
Otherwise you could convert POJO into JSON Tree value:
JsonNode tree = mapper.valueToTree(value);
and then modify it by adding properties etc.
2021 calling...
Simplest way I found to do this is #JsonUnwrapped:
public class Envelope<T> {
#JsonUnwrapped // content's fields are promoted alongside the envelope's
public T content;
// Transmission specific fields
public String url;
public long timestamp;
}
This works (bi-directionally) so long as Envelope's fieldnames do not clash with those of content. Also has a nice feature of keeping the transmission properties at the end of the serialised JSON.
One option is to add a field for this property and set it on the object before writing to JSON. A second option, if the property can be computed from other object properties you could just add a getter for it, for example:
public String getFullName() {
return getFirstName() + " " + getLastName();
}
And even though there's no matching field Jackson will automatically call this getter while writing the JSON and it will appear as fullName in the JSON output. If that won't work a third option is to convert the object to a map and then manipulate it however you need:
ObjectMapper mapper //.....
MyObject o //.....
long specialValue //.....
Map<String, Object> map = mapper.convertValue(o, new TypeReference<Map<String, Object>>() { });
map.put("specialValue", specialValue);
You're question didn't mention unmarshalling but if you need to do that as well then the first option would work fine but the second two would need some tweaking.
And as for writing different fields of the same object it sounds like a job for #JsonView
Using this abstract class:
#JsonTypeInfo(use = Id.NAME, include = As.PROPERTY, property = "type")
#JsonSubTypes({ #JsonSubTypes.Type(value = PostingTaskInstanceDto.class, name = "TI") })
public abstract class BasePostingDto {}
and this inherited class:
public class PostingTaskInstanceDto extends BasePostingDto {}
I get correct serialization for a single object. This works, using Spring-MVC:
#RequestMapping("/{id}")
#ResponseBody
public BasePostingDto findById(#PathVariable("id") Long id) {
return createDto(postingService.findById(id));
}
But if I retrieve a List of BasePostingDto from the remote controller, the type property is missing:
#RequestMapping("/by-user/all")
#ResponseBody
public List<BasePostingDto> findByUser() {
return createDtoList(postingService.findByUser(AuthUtils.getUser()));
}
Why is this and how can I force the type property?
Update: the type property is also included if I change List<BasePostingDto> to BasePostingDto[], however I would prefer to go with the List.
It sounds like the framework you are using (and which uses Jackson under the hood) is not passing full generics-aware type information.
I don't know how that can be fixed (it is problem with integration by framework, and not something Jackson can address), but the usual work around is for you to use sub-class of List:
public class PostingDtoList extends List<BasePostingDto> { }
and use that in signature, instead of generic type. This solves the issue because then the generic type signature is retained (since it is stored in super type declaration, and accessible via type-erased PostingDtoList class!).
In generally I think it is best to avoid using generic List and Map types as root type (and instead use POJO); partly because of problems issued (there are bigger problems when using XML for example). But it can be made to work if need be.
Is it possible to configure jackson to always add the type of the serialized object to the generated json output.
For example:
package org.acme;
class ClassA
{
String a;
String b;
}
and I want the generated json to be:
["org.acme.ClassA",{"a":"str1","b":"str2"}]
You can do that with enableDefaultTyping() of the ObjectMapper
e.g.
mapper.enableDefaultTyping(DefaultTyping.OBJECT_AND_NON_CONCRETE);
See ObjectMapper API
If your are free to change from Jackson and do not especially need the format to match the one your are showing you can try Genson http://code.google.com/p/genson.
For example if your requirement is to be able to deserialize interfaces or abstract classes based on the original type of the object you serialized you can do:
interface Entity {}
static class Person implements Entity {}
Genson genson = new Genson.Builder().setWithClassMetadata(true).create();
// json will be equal to {"#class":"my.package.Person"}
String json = genson.serialize(new Person());
// and now Genson is able to deserialize it back to Person using the information
// in the Json Object
Person person = (Person) genson.deserialize(json, Entity.class);
Another nice feature is the ability to define aliases for your classes, so you show less information in the json stream but also this allows you to do refactoring without worring of existing json streams (for example if you store it in a database).
Genson genson = new Genson.Builder().addAlias("person", Person.class).create();
// json value is {"#class": "person"}
String json = genson.serialize(new Person());
Have a look at the wiki.
In the Play framework i have a few models that have fields which are object references to other models. When i use renderJSON, i don't want those object references to be included. Currently for my needs i create a separate view model class which contains the fields i want, and in the controller i create instances of this view class as needed. Ideally i would like to be able to use the model class itself without having to write the view class.
Is there a way to annotate a field so that it will not be serialized when using renderJSON?
because play uses Gson for its Json serialization you can try the following:
public static void test()
{
Object foo = new SomeObject("testData");
Gson gson = new GsonBuilder()
.excludeFieldsWithModifiers(Modifier.TRANSIENT)
.create();
renderJSON(gson.toJson(foo));
}
now each field marked as transient will not be serialized. There is also another (better) way. You can use the com.google.gson.annotations.Expose annotation to mark each field you want to serialize.
public static void test()
{
Object foo = new SomeObject("testData");
Gson gson = new GsonBuilder()
.excludeFieldsWithoutExposeAnnotation()
.create();
renderJSON(gson.toJson(foo));
}
Using FlexJSON with play is another option, explained in this article: http://www.lunatech-research.com/archives/2011/04/20/play-framework-better-json-serialization-flexjson
Not sure why no one has written the most direct solution to this answer so I will do it here:
Simply mark the fields you do not want serialized via Gson as transient.
Here's an example:
public class Animal
{
private String name = "dog";
transient private int port = 80;
private String species = "canine";
transient private String password = "NoOneShouldSeeThis";
}
None of the items which are marked transient will be serialized.
When deserialized they will be set to their default (class default) values.
Resulting JSON will look like the following:
{"name":"dog","species":"canine"}
For more information on transient you can see the SO
Why does Java have transient fields?
I would override renderJSON to check a the field name against a member array of serialization exclusions.