I have the following code.
public class SomeClass {
private List<SomeOtherClass> referrals;
public List<SomeOtherClass> getReferrals() {
return referrals;
}
public void setReferrals( List<SomeOtherClass> referrals) {
this.referrals = referrals;
}
}
I have a json that I read from the wire. It is correctly formatted. I use GSON
My question is :
when I do fromJson(jsonString,SomeClass.class);
it gives an exception.
If I don't use List<SomeOtherClass> but instead use List<String> for referrals.
(in other word a primitive)
And iterate over each String and create SomeOtherClass object it works fine.
Why can't I just use fromJson(jsonString,SomeClass.class);
Related
I'm currently working on a project where I need to fetch a large amount of data from the Database and parse it into a specific Json format, I already have built my custom Serializers and Its working properly when i pass a List to Gson. But as I was already working with Streams from my JPA Layer, I thought I could pass the Stream down to the Gson parser so that it could transform it directly to my Json data. But I'm getting an empty Json object instead of a correctly populated one.
So, if anyone could point to me a way to make Gson work with Java 8 Streams or if this isn't possible currently.. i could not find anything on Google, so i came to Stackoverflow.
You could use JsonWriter to streaming your data to output stream:
public void writeJsonStream(OutputStream out, Stream<DataObject> data) throws IOException {
try(JsonWriter writer = new JsonWriter(new OutputStreamWriter(out, "UTF-8"))) {
writer.setIndent(" ");
writer.beginArray();
data.forEach(d -> {
d.beginObject();
d.name("yourField").value(d.getYourField());
....
d.endObject();
});
writer.endArray();
}
}
Note that you're in charge of controling the json structure.
That is, if your DataObject contains nested Object, you have to write beginObject()/endObject() respectively. The same goes for nested array.
It is not as trivial as one would expect, but it can be done in a generic way.
When you look into the Javadoc to TypeAdapterFactory, they provide a very simplistic way of writing a TypeAdapterFactory for a custom type. Alas, it does not work as expected because of problems with element type detection. The proper way to do this can be found in Gson-internal CollectionTypeAdapterFactory. It is quite complex, but taking what's necessary one can come up with something like that:
final class StreamTypeAdapterFactory implements TypeAdapterFactory {
#SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
#Override
public <T> TypeAdapter<T> create(Gson gson, TypeToken<T> typeToken) {
Type type = typeToken.getType();
Class<? super T> rawType = typeToken.getRawType();
if (!Stream.class.isAssignableFrom(rawType)) {
return null;
}
Type elementType = ExtraGsonTypes.getStreamElementType(type, rawType);
TypeAdapter<?> elementAdapter = gson.getAdapter(TypeToken.get(elementType));
return (TypeAdapter<T>) new StreamTypeAdapter<>(elementAdapter);
}
private static class StreamTypeAdapter<E> extends TypeAdapter<Stream<E>> {
private final TypeAdapter<E> elementAdapter;
StreamTypeAdapter(TypeAdapter<E> elementAdapter) {
this.elementAdapter = elementAdapter;
}
public void write(JsonWriter out, Stream<E> value) throws IOException {
out.beginArray();
for (E element : iterable(value)) {
elementAdapter.write(out, element);
}
out.endArray();
}
public Stream<E> read(JsonReader in) throws IOException {
Stream.Builder<E> builder = Stream.builder();
in.beginArray();
while (in.hasNext()) {
builder.add(elementAdapter.read(in));
}
in.endArray();
return builder.build();
}
}
private static <T> Iterable<T> iterable(Stream<T> stream) {
return stream::iterator;
}
}
The ExtraGsonTypes is a special class that I used to circumvent package-private access to $Gson$Types.getSupertype method. It's a hack that works if you're not using JDK 9's modules - you simply place this class in the same package as $Gson$Types:
package com.google.gson.internal;
import java.lang.reflect.*;
import java.util.stream.Stream;
public final class ExtraGsonTypes {
public static Type getStreamElementType(Type context, Class<?> contextRawType) {
return getContainerElementType(context, contextRawType, Stream.class);
}
private static Type getContainerElementType(Type context, Class<?> contextRawType, Class<?> containerSupertype) {
Type containerType = $Gson$Types.getSupertype(context, contextRawType, containerSupertype);
if (containerType instanceof WildcardType) {
containerType = ((WildcardType)containerType).getUpperBounds()[0];
}
if (containerType instanceof ParameterizedType) {
return ((ParameterizedType) containerType).getActualTypeArguments()[0];
}
return Object.class;
}
}
(I filed an issue about that in GitHub)
You use it in the following way:
Gson gson = new GsonBuilder()
.registerTypeAdapterFactory(new StreamTypeAdapterFactory())
.create();
System.out.println(gson.toJson(Stream.of(1, 2, 3)));
I need to replace the DateTime serialization for JSON in WCF REST Self Hosted service. Right now, I'm using something like the following code to do it, but it's definitely not the way to go since it requires manipulating each class.
[DataContract]
public class Test
{
[IgnoreDataMember]
public DateTime StartDate;
[DataMember(Name = "StartDate")]
public string StartDateStr
{
get { return DateUtil.DateToStr(StartDate); }
set { StartDate = DateTime.Parse(value); }
}
}
where my utility function DateUtil.DateToStr does all the formatting work.
Is there any easy way to do it without having to touch the attributes on my classes which have the DataContract attribute? Ideally, there would be no attributes, but a couple of lines of code in my configuration to replace the serializer with one where I've overridden DateTime serialization.
Everything that I've found looks like I have to replace huge pieces of the pipeline.
This article doesn't appear to apply because in I'm using WebServiceHost not HttpServiceHost, which not part of the 4.5.1 Framework.
JSON.NET Serializer for WCF REST Services
By default WCF uses DataContractJsonSerializer to serialize data into JSON. Unfortunatelly date from this serializer is in very difficult format to parse by human brain.
"DateTime": "\/Date(1535481994306+0200)\/"
To override this behavior we need to write custom IDispatchMessageFormatter. This class will receive all data which should be returned to requester and change it according to our needs.
To make it happen to the operations in the endpoint add custom formatter - ClientJsonDateFormatter:
ServiceHost host=new ServiceHost(typeof(CustomService));
host.AddServiceEndpoint(typeof(ICustomContract), new WebHttpBinding(), Consts.WebHttpAddress);
foreach (var endpoint in host.Description.Endpoints)
{
if (endpoint.Address.Uri.Scheme.StartsWith("http"))
{
foreach (var operation in endpoint.Contract.Operations)
{
operation.OperationBehaviors.Add(new ClientJsonDateFormatter());
}
endpoint.Behaviors.Add(new WebHttpBehavior());
}
}
ClientJsonDateFormatter is simple class which just applies formatter ClientJsonDateFormatter
public class ClientJsonDateFormatter : IOperationBehavior
{
public void AddBindingParameters(OperationDescription operationDescription, BindingParameterCollection bindingParameters) { }
public void ApplyClientBehavior(OperationDescription operationDescription, ClientOperation clientOperation) { }
public void ApplyDispatchBehavior(OperationDescription operationDescription, DispatchOperation dispatchOperation)
{
dispatchOperation.Formatter = new ResponseJsonFormatter(operationDescription);
}
public void Validate(OperationDescription operationDescription) { }
}
In the formatter we took imput and serialize it with the changed Serializer:
public class ResponseJsonFormatter : IDispatchMessageFormatter
{
OperationDescription Operation;
public ResponseJsonFormatter(OperationDescription operation)
{
this.Operation = operation;
}
public void DeserializeRequest(Message message, object[] parameters)
{
}
public Message SerializeReply(MessageVersion messageVersion, object[] parameters, object result)
{
string json=Newtonsoft.Json.JsonConvert.SerializeObject(result);
byte[] bytes = Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(json);
Message replyMessage = Message.CreateMessage(messageVersion, Operation.Messages[1].Action, new RawDataWriter(bytes));
replyMessage.Properties.Add(WebBodyFormatMessageProperty.Name, new WebBodyFormatMessageProperty(WebContentFormat.Raw));
return replyMessage;
}
}
And to send information to client we need data writer - RawDataWriter. Its implementation is simple:
class RawDataWriter : BodyWriter
{
byte[] data;
public RawDataWriter(byte[] data)
: base(true)
{
this.data = data;
}
protected override void OnWriteBodyContents(XmlDictionaryWriter writer)
{
writer.WriteStartElement("Binary");
writer.WriteBase64(data, 0, data.Length);
writer.WriteEndElement();
}
}
Applying all code will result in returning date in more friendly format:
"DateTime":"2018-08-28T20:56:48.6411976+02:00"
To show it in practice I created example in the github branch DateTimeFormatter.
Please check also this answer as very likely you also will need it.
There is a limitation in JSON to convert DateTime, specially according to your case.
Please see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb412170(v=vs.110).aspx
and read the section Dates/Times and JSON
To resolve this problem, I simply changed the type of serialization from JSON to XML for all the calls including DateTime.
After long time discussion ,I have find out the solution for it.
Please Use the following Code to Solve serialized date..
[IgnoreDataMember]
public DateTime? PerformanceDate { get; set; }
[DataMember(EmitDefaultValue = false, Name = "PerformanceDate")]
public string UpdateStartDateStr
{
get
{
if (this.PerformanceDate.HasValue)
return this.PerformanceDate.Value.ToUniversalTime().ToString("s", CultureInfo.InvariantCulture);
else
return null;
}
set
{
// should implement this...
}
}
I have structure IntEx - in short it extends normal Int32 and processed operation. It looks like this:
[Serializable]
public struct IntEx
{
private int internalValue;
private IntEx(int value)
{
internalValue = value;
}
public static implicit operator int(IntEx value)
{
return value.internalValue;
}
public static implicit operator IntEx(int value)
{
return new IntEx(value);
}
}
If we send this structure through WCF it serialize using JSON and output will "nicely look". Like we will use sample code below:
DataContractJsonSerializer jsonSerializer = new DataContractJsonSerializer(typeof(TestClass));
using (MemoryStream stream = new MemoryStream())
{
jsonSerializer.WriteObject(stream, testClass);
string serializedString = Encoding.UTF8.GetString(stream.GetBuffer());
Console.WriteLine("JSON: {0}", serializedString);
}
public class TestClass
{
public int I1 { get; set; }
public IntEx I2 { get; set; }
}
Output look like this
JSON: {"I1":11,"I2":{"internalValue":22}}
Client and other "third-part" progam use this format (with internalValue).
Using IntEx is widely use in my application. One of the object is serialized to XML (some kind of setting). This object use IntEx as type.
So I have to implement IXmlSerializable to structure IntEx, because without this property is serialized like empty node
XML: <TestClass><I1>11</I1><I2 /></TestClass>
If I change IntEx to use IXmlSerializable
[Serializable]
public struct IntEx : IXmlSerializable
{
private int internalValue;
private IntEx(int value)
{
internalValue = value;
}
public static implicit operator int(IntEx value)
{
return value.internalValue;
}
public static implicit operator IntEx(int value)
{
return new IntEx(value);
}
System.Xml.Schema.XmlSchema IXmlSerializable.GetSchema()
{
return null;
}
void IXmlSerializable.ReadXml(System.Xml.XmlReader reader)
{
throw new NotImplementedException();
}
void IXmlSerializable.WriteXml(System.Xml.XmlWriter writer)
{
writer.WriteValue(internalValue);
}
}
XML output look ok
XML: <TestClass><I1>11</I1><I2>22</I2></TestClass>
but all my service break down, since now JSON look like this:
JSON: {"I1":11,"I2":"<IntEx xmlns=\"http:\/\/schemas.datacontract.org\/2004\/07\/TestJSONSerialization\">22<\/IntEx>"}
I read that if you use IXmlSerializable, JSON serialization "think" that I'm responsible for serialize so leave this object to me... But how can I change back to "original" serialization.
So now I'm in deadend... I need JSON output look like before, but I also need to some how force to write setting to XML with two conditions:
internalValue should remain private - it shouldn't be accessible using some public Property
I don't want rewrite bunch of code to chaneg (use boxing for JSON's properties) or change all possible property or class that can be saved to XML file.
So can anyone give me some clue, how I can resolve this issue? :/
you can use DataContractJsonSerializer with IDataContractSurrogate. using the IDataContractSurrogate to convert "IntEx" to "IntExJson", and the "IntExJson" don't need to inherit from IXmlSerializable.
IDataContractSurrogate can be used to remove some features from object, and convert to the similar object. and then use:
public DataContractJsonSerializer(Type type, IEnumerable<Type> knownTypes, int maxItemsInObjectGraph, bool ignoreExtensionDataObject, IDataContractSurrogate dataContractSurrogate, bool alwaysEmitTypeInformation);
to serialize the object to json. the deserialization is same.
I am having a deserialization problem using the GSON library.
The following is the JSON code which I try to deserialize
{"response": {
"#service": "CreateUser",
"#response-code": "100",
"#timestamp": "2010-11-27T15:52:43-08:00",
"#version": "1.0",
"error-message": "",
"responseData": {
"user-guid": "023804207971199"
}
}}
I create the following classes
public class GsonContainer {
private GsonResponse mResponse;
public GsonContainer() { }
//get & set methods
}
public class GsonResponse {
private String mService;
private String mResponseCode;
private String mTimeStamp;
private String mVersion;
private String mErrorMessage;
private GsonResponseCreateUser mResponseData;
public GsonResponse(){
}
//gets and sets method
}
public class GsonResponseCreateUser {
private String mUserGuid;
public GsonResponseCreateUser(){
}
//get and set methods
}
After calling the GSON library the data is null. Any ideas what is wrong with the classes?
Thx in advance for your help ... I assume it's something trivial ....
#user523392 said:
the member variables have to match exactly what is given in the JSON response
This is not the case.
There are a few options for specifying how Java field names map to JSON element names.
One solution that would work for the case in the original question above is to annotate the Java class members with the #SerializedName to very explicitly declare what JSON element name it maps to.
// output: [MyObject: element=value1, elementTwo=value2]
import com.google.gson.Gson;
import com.google.gson.GsonBuilder;
import com.google.gson.annotations.SerializedName;
public class Foo
{
static String jsonInput =
"{" +
"\"element\":\"value1\"," +
"\"#element-two\":\"value2\"" +
"}";
public static void main(String[] args)
{
GsonBuilder gsonBuilder = new GsonBuilder();
Gson gson = gsonBuilder.create();
MyObject object = gson.fromJson(jsonInput, MyObject.class);
System.out.println(object);
}
}
class MyObject
{
String element;
#SerializedName("#element-two")
String elementTwo;
#Override
public String toString()
{
return String.format(
"[MyObject: element=%s, elementTwo=%s]",
element, elementTwo);
}
}
Another approach is to create a custom FieldNamingStrategy to specify how Java member names are translated to JSON element names. This example would apply the same name mapping to all Java member names. This approach would not work for the original example above, because not all of the JSON element names follow the same naming pattern -- they don't all start with '#' and some use camel case naming instead of separating name parts with '-'. An instance of this FieldNamingStrategy would be used when building the Gson instance (gsonBuilder.setFieldNamingStrategy(new MyFieldNamingStrategy());).
class MyFieldNamingStrategy implements FieldNamingStrategy
{
// Translates the field name into its JSON field name representation.
#Override
public String translateName(Field field)
{
String name = field.getName();
StringBuilder translation = new StringBuilder();
translation.append('#');
for (int i = 0, length = name.length(); i < length; i++)
{
char c = name.charAt(i);
if (Character.isUpperCase(c))
{
translation.append('-');
c = Character.toLowerCase(c);
}
translation.append(c);
}
return translation.toString();
}
}
Another approach to manage how Java field names map to JSON element names is to specify a FieldNamingPolicy when building the Gson instance, e.g., gsonBuilder.setFieldNamingPolicy(FieldNamingPolicy.LOWER_CASE_WITH_DASHES);. This also would not work with the original example, however, since it applies the same name mapping policy to all situations.
The JSON response above cannot be deserialized by GSON because of the special characters # and -. GSON is based on reflections and the member variables have to match exactly what is given in the JSON response.
I get an InvalidCastException converting a linq entity list to a businessobject list using the .Cast<> operator.
"Unable to cast object of type 'Ticketing.ticket' to type
'Ticketing.ModelTicket'." (namespace name was changed because underscore was causing unneeded formatting)
here's my business object class
public sealed class ModelTicket
{
public ModelTicket(ticket ticket)
{
_Ticket = ticket;
}
public static implicit operator ModelTicket(ticket item)
{
return new ModelTicket(item);
}
}
and here's my extension method to convert a list of linq objects to a list of business objects:
public static class ModelTicketExtensions
{
public static List<ModelTicket> ToModelTickets(this List<ticket> list)
{
return list.Cast<ModelTicket>().ToList();// exception on cast
}
}
I would go with the following function:
public static class ModelTicketExtensions
{
public static List<ModelTicket> ToModelTickets(this List<ticket> list)
{
return list.ConvertAll<ModelTicket>(t => (ModelTicket)t);
}
}
If that doesn't work for you, then you can go the completely direct route:
public static class ModelTicketExtensions
{
public static List<ModelTicket> ToModelTickets(this List<ticket> list)
{
return list.ConvertAll<ModelTicket>(t => new ModelTicket(t));
}
}
I'd say the second is arguable more clear on exactly what is happening.