2016-05-09 16:57 GMT+02:00 Dmitry Kornilov <dmitry.kornilov_at_oracle.com>:
> Hi,
>
> Romain finally posted some code! Good news! ;)
>
> > 1. doesnt prevent impl not jsonp based (genson got some optimization
> incompatible with jsonp IIRC),
>
> The point is that JSONB uses JSONP based parser and not designed to use
> parser other than JSONP. It will perfectly work with third party parser
> implementing JSONP interface. I personally not a big fan of JSONP,
> especially the way it is developing now. But it’s a standard and it’s right
> to use it.
>
> > 2. why should the user potentially mess up or suppose anything about
> jsonp there?
>
> Serialiser/Deserializer is a low level API. These interfaces we use
> internally for the same reasons. We are using JSONP parser. It would be
> fair to give it directly to users.
>
An implementation can choose to rely on jsonp and JsonReader instead of
JsonParser and it would work too so - and there is a small overlap with 1.
- why going that deep there and just not assuming the need of our own API
in jsonb (providing jsonp there we delegate the responsability of our own
API to another spec which is fine when it does the same but jsonb has this
mapping thing - no real order on user land - making the streaming not
matching the user expectation very well in term of API).
What if a user eats more than the "current" object? -> exception? Should it
even be allowed?
What if a user needs to try a field? -> we fail if we don't provide a jsonb
wrapper able to mark/browse the current object
-> this use case if the following "In v1 we had "marker": string but in
v2 we have "marker":{"foo":"bar"}. It can sound insane and irreal but it is
actually common and keeping in mind json comes maybe not from java it is
even more obvious (angular2 beta -> rc just did this kind of trick to its
users).
In short: think we can't be lazy and avoid to hide jsonp there. However we
can reduce the amount of methods (we don't need a method for
byte|long|BigNumber|... but we only need a single one by kind of method
since typing is already handled in jsonb runtime)
>
> > Main issue I have there is in SerializationContext and list handling
> where "key" will be the list key and not the instance one. We can of course
> add another method for arrays or pass a "context”
> > to give the information (SerializationTreeContext = {array =
> [true|false], key = [string]} and we remove the key from the signature).
>
> I agree with this one. We need to add a method to SerialisationContext
> which serialises an object without a key (array element).
>
>
Note: not sure you noticed but I removed convert method from my snippet,
for me jsonb can ensure it is used as configured and it doesnt loop (guess
risk was stackoverflow? or was it just cause we were @jsonp level so we
needed to add back jsonb one?)
Last note: think we should add to the context the propertyNamingStrategy to
keep to the user the java view. This way he can convert a java name to a
json name (use case: reusable (de)serializers/framework (de)serializers). I
would just put a getter in contexts.
> Thanks,
> Dmitry
>
>
> On 09 May 2016, at 08:40, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau_at_tomitribe.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> I would really prefer a lighter version without jsonp references then:
> https://gist.github.com/rmannibucau/66907a09c1f062b378e67c7f511425c0 .
> Note: I tried to comment a bit big changes with "RMB" notes.
>
> Main issue I have there is in SerializationContext and list handling
> where "key" will be the list key and not the instance one. We can of course
> add another method for arrays or pass a "context" to give the information
> (SerializationTreeContext = {array = [true|false], key = [string]} and we
> remove the key from the signature).
>
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
> 2016-05-08 21:59 GMT+02:00 Dmitry Kornilov <dmitry.kornilov_at_oracle.com>:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Here is a final rework.
>>
>>
>> 1. We decided to be consistent with other frameworks and reverted
>> back to a version with serialization/deserialization contexts. All JSON
>> binding framewords now use a similar solution.
>> 2. If we declare integration with Jsonp we need to use its
>> parser/generator interfaces instead of Jsonb wrappers. It also simplifies
>> the API.
>>
>>
>> Please take a look. If there is no (or not many) negative comments I will
>> consider it as a final version.
>>
>> Dmitry, Roman
>>
>> public interface JsonbSerializer<T> {
>>
>> /**
>> * Serializes an object to JSON.
>> *
>> * @param obj object to serialize
>> * @param generator JSON generator to use
>> * @param ctx JSONB mapper context
>> */
>> void serialize(T obj, JsonGenerator generator, SerializationContext
>> ctx);
>> }
>>
>> public interface JsonbDeserializer<T> {
>>
>> /**
>> * Deserialize an object from JSON.
>> * Cursor of JsonParser is at START_OBJECT.
>> *
>> * @param parser Json parser
>> * @param ctx Deserialization context
>> * @param rtType type of returned object
>> * @return deserialized instance
>> */
>> T deserialize(JsonParser parser, DeserializationContext ctx, Type
>> rtType);
>> }
>>
>> public interface SerializationContext {
>>
>> /**
>> * Serializes arbitrary object to JSON, using current {_at_link
>> javax.json.stream.JsonGenerator} instance.
>> *
>> * @param key JSON key name
>> * @param object object to serialize
>> * @param generator JSONP generator to serialize with
>> * @param <T> Type of serialized object
>> */
>> <T> void serialize(String key, T object, JsonGenerator generator);
>>
>> /**
>> * Converts string value into provided type. String value has to be
>> single JSON value, not a part
>> * of a JSON document representing JSON object.
>> *
>> * @param obj object to convert to string
>> * @param generator JSONP generator to serialize with
>> * @param <T> type of object
>> *
>> * @return converted string value
>> * @throws javax.json.bind.JsonbException if conversion of given type
>> is not supported
>> */
>> <T> String convertDefault(T obj, JsonGenerator generator);
>> }
>>
>> ublic interface DeserializationContext {
>>
>> /**
>> * Deserializes JSON stream into instance of provided class using
>> {_at_link javax.json.stream.JsonParser}.
>> * JsonParser cursor have to be at KEY_NAME before START_OBJECT to
>> call this method.
>> *
>> * @param clazz Type to deserialize into. No arg constructor required.
>> * @param parser JSONP parser to drive
>> * @param <T> Type of class
>> * @return Deserialized instance
>> */
>> <T> T deserialize(Class<T> clazz, JsonParser parser);
>>
>> /**
>> * Deserializes JSON stream into instance of provided class using
>> {_at_link javax.json.stream.JsonParser}.
>> * JsonParser cursor have to be at KEY_NAME before START_OBJECT to
>> call this method.
>> *
>> * @param type Type to deserialize into. No arg constructor required.
>> * @param parser JSONP parser to drive
>> * @param <T> Type to deserialize into
>> * @return Deserialized instance
>> */
>> <T> T deserialize(Type type, JsonParser parser);
>>
>> /**
>> * Converts string value into provided type. String value has to be
>> single JSON value, not a part
>> * of a JSON document representing JSON object.
>> *
>> * @param clazz Class to convert string value into
>> * @param value single JSON value to convert
>> * @param <T> type of toClass
>> * @return converted instance
>> * @throws javax.json.bind.JsonbException if conversion of provided
>> type is not supported
>> */
>> <T> T convertDefault(Class<T> clazz, String value);
>>
>> }
>>
>>
>> On 02 May 2016, at 16:31, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau_at_tomitribe.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, like more but still few things (sorry):
>>
>> Write side:
>> - writeObject(T) would be valid since we have a contextual key too and
>> would act as an adapter more or less. writeObject(String, T) would be for a
>> sub object then.
>> - do we need writeArray - I think so but case is limit enough to be
>> ignored.
>> - comment says "void writeInt(String key, int value);",: would like we
>> return JsonbWriter to keep the API fluent, is that possible?
>>
>> Read side:
>> - more or less the same: I think we need for symmetry getObject(String,
>> type)
>> - [semantic and consistency with jsonp] if we really want to keep parser
>> constraints (which are technically valid) maybe we should just go with
>> JsonbParser instead of reader (and ignore previous point)?
>>
>> Sounds close for me! :)
>>
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>> 2016-05-02 16:17 GMT+02:00 Dmitry Kornilov <dmitry.kornilov_at_oracle.com>:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Here is a new version of API.
>>>
>>> 1. We removed XXXContext classes and moved some methods from there to
>>> JsonbReader/Writer classes.
>>> 2. JsonObject is not a main citizen now. (Romain should be happy :) )
>>>
>>> Take a look. Tell us what you think.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Dmitry, Roman
>>>
>>> public interface JsonbSerializer<T> {
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * @param obj Object to process
>>> * @param writer Low level JSON writer
>>> * @param ctx Jsonb mapper
>>> */
>>> void serialize(T obj, JsonbWriter writer);
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> public interface JsonbDeserializer<T> {
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * @param parser Low level JSON reader
>>> * @param ctx Jsonb mapper
>>> * @param rtType Runtime type of T
>>> */
>>> T deserialize(JsonbReader reader, Type rtType);
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * Jsonb wrapper around JSONP generator + helper methods.
>>> */
>>> public interface JsonbWriter {
>>>
>>> // methods delegated from JSONP generator
>>> // void writeInt(String key, int value);
>>> // etc.
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * Serializes and writes a given object.
>>> */
>>> <T> void writeObject(String key, T obj);
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * Jsonb wrapper around JSONP parser + helper methods.
>>> */
>>> public interface JsonbReader {
>>>
>>> // methods delegated from jsonp parser such as
>>> // long getLong();
>>> // boolean hasNext();
>>> // etc.
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * Deserializes JSON stream into instance of provided class with JSONB using {_at_link javax.json.stream.JsonParser}.
>>> * JsonParser cursor have to be at KEY_NAME before START_OBJECT to call this method.
>>> */
>>> <T> T getObject(Class<T> clazz);
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * Similar as above for generic types.
>>> */
>>> <T> T getObject(Type typeInfo);
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 29 Apr 2016, at 23:43, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau_at_tomitribe.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 29 avr. 2016 20:20, "Roman Grigoriadi" <roman.grigoriadi_at_oracle.com>
>>> a écrit :
>>> >
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > 1. I am for a Type as a rtType parameter. It may be a parameterized
>>> type itself, you can get raw class from it, but you can't get type params
>>> if a static class will be passed.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Work to start - there are workarounds if needed.
>>>
>>> > 2. User will know if current event is start object or start array. But
>>> we can add it for convenience.
>>> >
>>> > 3. Did you mean methods, which are in (De)Serialization contexts? <T>
>>> void serialize(String key, T object); and <T> T deserialize(Class<T>/Type
>>> clazz);?
>>> >
>>>
>>> Yes. More I think more I see context as a state holder - which part of
>>> the graph i am in - than a writer/reader. Can just be a semantic issue.
>>> What do others think?
>>>
>>> > 4. Actually if type is supported or not will not change during
>>> runtime. User should know from the spec / vendor doc if conversion for a
>>> given type is supported. We can throw exception if it is not supported or
>>> return result as Optional.
>>>
>>> Just thought it was more fluent but will not be that sad if tou think it
>>> was not a good idea.
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Roman
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 04/29/2016 03:28 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Le 29 avr. 2016 15:03, "Dmitry Kornilov" <dmitry.kornilov_at_oracle.com>
>>> a écrit :
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > 1.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Imagine that we have a serialiser defined as this:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > JsonbDeserializer<Animal>
>>> >> >
>>> >> > There is a generic Dog class extending Animal interface:
>>> >> > Dog<T> extends Animal
>>> >> >
>>> >> > And the actual object that we are deserialising is:
>>> >> > Dog<WhatEver>
>>> >> >
>>> >> > ParametrizedType representing Dog<WhatEver> type will be passed as
>>> rtType parameter. I suppose it’s runtime type, not static.
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> You can get Object for generic converters so static type would be
>>> better in such a case.
>>> >>
>>> >> > 2.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I am not sure. Maybe we need it. Roman, please answer.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > 3.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I didn’t understand what are you talking about. The best would be
>>> if you modify our API code from the previous email so we can better
>>> understand what you mean.
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> Basically bring back Jsonb API for a subobject us the idea.
>>> readObject(Type) typically or readObject(Type, attribute). Idea is to use
>>> Object instead of JsonXXX everywhere as first class citizen. We can provide
>>> an unwrap(JsonXxx) if user wants to go lower level bit i dont see it useful
>>> yet.
>>> >>
>>> >> > 4.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > We don’t use optional constraints in our code. We are sort of old
>>> school, you know. :)
>>> >> > But the idea is reasonable. Let us discuss it.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Thanks,
>>> >> > Dmitry
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> On 29 Apr 2016, at 13:07, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau_at_tomitribe.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Hi Roman,
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> looks better, few comments:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> 1- @param rtType Runtime type of T think it should be static type
>>> more than runtime no?
>>> >> >> 2- do we want readStructure(Type)?
>>> >> >> 3- more generally we should get mapped versions of
>>> [read|write][Object|Array|Structure] (readObject(Type) typically) otherwise
>>> we kind of loose the mapping level jsonb should be at, no?
>>> >> >> 4- [open question] do we go with optional for convertion and get
>>> rid of supports method: convert(.../*supported case*/).orElse(..../* not
>>> supported */)
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Main point is 3, once solved I think we are good.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> >> >> @rmannibucau
>>> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> 2016-04-29 12:23 GMT+02:00 Dmitry Kornilov <
>>> dmitry.kornilov_at_oracle.com>:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Hi,
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Romain, thanks for your suggestions. Below you can find a fixed
>>> version of serialisers API. What’s changed:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> JsonbGenerator/JsonbParser renamed to JsonbWriter/JsonbReader.
>>> >> >>> JsonbWriter and JsonbReader are not extended from the
>>> corresponding JSONP classes as Romain suggested.
>>> >> >>> Some JSON processing methods added to JsonbWriter and
>>> JsonbReader. Possible we will need to add some more. Your suggestions?
>>> >> >>> Introduced rtType parameter in JsonbDeserializer.deserialize
>>> method. It holds a runtime type of an object.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> WDYT?
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Dmitry, Roman
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> public interface JsonbSerializer<T> {
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * @param obj Object to process
>>> >> >>> * @param writer Low level JSON writer
>>> >> >>> * @param ctx Jsonb mapper
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> void serialize(T obj, JsonbWriter writer,
>>> SerializationContext ctx);
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> }
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> public interface JsonbDeserializer<T> {
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * @param parser Low level JSON reader
>>> >> >>> * @param ctx Jsonb mapper
>>> >> >>> * @param rtType Runtime type of T
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> T deserialize(JsonbReader reader, DeserializationContext ctx,
>>> Type rtType);
>>> >> >>> }
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Jsonb wrapper around JSONP generator + helper methods.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> public interface JsonbWriter {
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> // methods delegated from JSONP generator
>>> >> >>> // ...
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Writes a JSONP object.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> void writeObject(javax.json.JsonObject obj);
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Writes a JSONP array.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> void writeArray(javax.json.JsonArray arr);
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Writes a JSONP object.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> void writeStructure(javax.json.JsonStructure struct);
>>> >> >>> }
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Jsonb wrapper around JSONP parser + helper methods.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> public interface JsonbReader {
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> // methods delegated from jsonp parser
>>> >> >>> // ...
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Reads a JSONP object.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> javax.json.JsonObject readObject();
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Reads a JSONP array.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> javax.json.JsonArray readArray();
>>> >> >>> }
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Jsonb mapper used for serialization.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> public interface SerializationContext {
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Serializes arbitrary object to JSON with JSONB, using
>>> current {_at_link javax.json.stream.JsonGenerator} instance.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> <T> void serialize(String key, T object);
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Checks if type is supported for conversion to string by
>>> JSONB.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> boolean supportsConversion(Class<?> clazz);
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Converts string value into provided type. String value has
>>> to be single JSON value, not a part
>>> >> >>> * of a JSON document representing JSON object / array.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> <T> String convertDefault(T obj);
>>> >> >>> }
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Jsonb deserialization mapper.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> public interface DeserializationContext {
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Deserializes JSON stream into instance of provided class
>>> with JSONB using {_at_link javax.json.stream.JsonParser}.
>>> >> >>> * JsonParser cursor have to be at KEY_NAME before
>>> START_OBJECT to call this method.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> <T> T deserialize(Class<T> clazz);
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Similar as above for generic types.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> <T> T deserialize(TypeInfo<T> typeInfo);
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Checks if type is supported for conversion from string by
>>> JSONB.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> boolean supportsConversion(Class<?> toClass);
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> /**
>>> >> >>> * Converts string value into provided type. String value has
>>> to be single JSON value, not a part
>>> >> >>> * of a JSON document representing JSON object.
>>> >> >>> */
>>> >> >>> <T> T convertDefault(Class<T> toClass, String value);
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> }
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>> On 28 Apr 2016, at 16:43, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau_at_tomitribe.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> 2016-04-28 16:09 GMT+02:00 Roman Grigoriadi <
>>> roman.grigoriadi_at_oracle.com>:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Inline, thanks, Roman
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> On 04/28/2016 03:31 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> 2016-04-28 15:26 GMT+02:00 Roman Grigoriadi <
>>> roman.grigoriadi_at_oracle.com>:
>>> >> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>> Thought main reason for (de)seserializers is to provide such
>>> a low level API to drive the JSONP by hand. The drawback is that user must
>>> use Parser/Generator judiciously, because it is shared with JSONB runtime.
>>> If we hide it completely, what methods would JsonbXXX interfaces have? You
>>> cant do anything like getValue(String key), because once parser is advanced
>>> it cannot move back. How about dropping JsonbXXX completly and using JSONP
>>> Generator / Parser along with (De)SerializationContexts?
>>> >> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> Well that's one of the reason why we shouldn't expose jsonp.
>>> So here what I had in mind:
>>> >> >>>>>> - expose all method of jsonp but in Jsonb API
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> How does hiding JSONP and providing 1:1 JSONB interface help
>>> against biasing runtime with inconsistently advanced parser? What are other
>>> pitfalls if we expose JSONP in deserializers?
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> As a user you see the json structure not the stream so having a
>>> parser is an implementation detail you don't need (you need a reader more
>>> than a parser to be honest). Then up to the jsonb runtime to bufferise what
>>> needs to be bufferised to keep its parser up to date.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> The other pitfalls I see is to not be able to present a
>>> consistent view to the users and open the unsafe usage with next jsonp
>>> releases (if you use jsonp N+1 with jsonb N generations).
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> - the Jsonb impl is free to use markable parser (able to
>>> rewind/forward if needed) to make user happy whatever he does
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Is it? What about custom JSONP Providers in JsonbConfig? Aren't
>>> implementations supposed to use only JSONP API as their backend?
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> Didn't follow. Maybe my comment was unclear: the markable impl
>>> would be an internal of jsonb runtime.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> - Jsonb versions should get object/array handling in addition
>>> >> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>> so deserializer method may look like:
>>> >> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>> T deserialize(JsonParser parser, //JSONP parser
>>> >> >>>>>>> DeserializationContext context)
>>> //has JSONB mapper related methods
>>> >> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>> or
>>> >> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>> T deserialize(DeserializationContext context)
>>> >> >>>>>>> and add
>>> >> >>>>>>> JsonParser DeserializationContext#getParser() ?
>>> >> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>> According to generics part, did you mean that you would not
>>> be able to resolve X if Deserializer is defined as
>>> MyDeserializer<MyPojo<X>> and you want JSONB to pass a type of X into
>>> deserializer? So that deserialize(...) method would be added by argument
>>> Type typeOfX ?
>>> >> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> If I got it right yes. (De)Serializer can be generic and loose
>>> the type at instantiation (or not even have it if in a framework where new
>>> MYDeser<X>(){} wouldnt work). So the minimum the runtime can do is to say
>>> "hey, this is the best type I can find for what you have to return".
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> It didn't make much sense to me to declare a serializer in such
>>> way. If you declare it like "class <T> MyDeser<MyPojo<T>> you still have to
>>> provide some T during instantiation (will be erased). If T is declared in a
>>> class, which creates instance of a serializer, how will JSONB know what is
>>> it bound to in runtime?
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> You have the model and know you need to get an Animal for
>>> instance. Then if it is an interface it will likely not work and the
>>> deserializer will need to take the impl from somewhere else but at least as
>>> a runtime you did your best and you would work in most of cases.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>> Thanks,
>>> >> >>>>>>> Roman
>>> >> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>> On 04/27/2016 03:16 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>> 2016-04-27 15:12 GMT+02:00 Roman Grigoriadi <
>>> roman.grigoriadi_at_oracle.com>:
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>> The difference between JsonbXXX and (De)SerContext is
>>> separation of processing logic, former has methods for driving JSONP,
>>> latter uses JSONB on top of it.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>> I get it but the main purpose of the mapper if IMO to hide
>>> the parsing part so I would keep it but not as a main concept. That said
>>> I'm ok with that if I'm alone on this side ;).
>>> >> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>> I don't get whats wrong with runtime type, for
>>> serialization. Have you noticed
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>> <T> T deserialize(TypeInfo<T> typeInfo);
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>> method? It will deserialize generic types.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>> Sure but how do you do a new X() if you don't know X()? so
>>> the deserialize should get the static type somehow. <T> T deserialize() is
>>> an option but guess having the type in the signature allows to not
>>> instantiate it if not needed.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>> Roman.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>> On 04/27/2016 02:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Roman,
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Few points but globally I think we move in the right
>>> direction!
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> - "extends JsonXXX" I'd replace the extends by a
>>> delegation to keep the fluent API typed (= return type is JsonbXXX and not
>>> JsonXXX) and control over jsonb API.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> - I don't fully get the difference between context and
>>> JsonbXXX, i'd merge them (otherwise we would just using jsonp API but as
>>> mentionned in previous point it has the drawback to loose all the control.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> - deserialization: we still need the type found by the
>>> runtime (reflection) otherwise we can't allow generic serializers at all
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 2016-04-27 14:33 GMT+02:00 Roman Grigoriadi <
>>> roman.grigoriadi_at_oracle.com>:
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi experts,
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> following previous discussions for including
>>> de/serializers in JSONB along with adapters, here is proposal for
>>> interfaces in JSONB API:
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> public interface JsonbSerializer<T> {
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> void serialize(T obj, JsonbGenerator generator,
>>> SerializationContext ctx);
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> }
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> public interface JsonbDeserializer<T> {
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> T deserialize(JsonbParser parser,
>>> DeserializationContext ctx);
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> }
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> /**
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> * Jsonb decorator for JSONP generator. Includes
>>> validation for writing END_OBJECT / END_ARRAY checking level of closed JSON
>>> structure.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> * Helper generator methods may be added here.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> */
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> public interface JsonbGenerator extends JsonGenerator {
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> }/**
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> * Jsonb decorator for JSONP parser. Includes validation
>>> of cursor position after leaving deserializer, alters hasNext() behavior.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> * Helper parser methods may be added here.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> */
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> public interface JsonbParser extends JsonParser {
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> }
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> public interface SerializationContext {
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> /**
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> * Serializes arbitrary object to JSON with JSONB,
>>> using current {_at_link javax.json.stream.JsonGenerator} instance.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> */
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> <T> void serialize(String key, T object);
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> /**
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> * Checks if type is supported for conversion to
>>> string by JSONB.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> */
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> boolean supportsConversion(Class<?> clazz);
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> /**
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> * Converts string value into provided type. String
>>> value has to be single JSON value, not a part
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> * of a JSON document representing JSON object /
>>> array.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> */
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> <T> String convertDefault(T obj);
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> }public interface DeserializationContext {
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> /**
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> * Deserializes JSON stream into instance of provided
>>> class with JSONB using {_at_link javax.json.stream.JsonParser}.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> * JsonParser cursor have to be at KEY_NAME before
>>> START_OBJECT to call this method.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> */
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> <T> T deserialize(Class<T> clazz);
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> /**
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> * Similar as above for generic types.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> */
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> <T> T deserialize(TypeInfo<T> typeInfo);
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> /**
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> * Checks if type is supported for conversion from
>>> string by JSONB.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> */
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> boolean supportsConversion(Class<?> toClass);
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> /**
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> * Converts string value into provided type. String
>>> value has to be single JSON value, not a part
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> * of a JSON document representing JSON object.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> */
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> <T> T convertDefault(Class<T> toClass, String value);
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> }
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> JsonbParser / JsonbGenerator objects are supposed to
>>> decorate JSONP behavior.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> For example in case of JsonParser hasNext() call may be
>>> altered to return false if currently deserialized object has ended in the
>>> stream. Helper methods (like nextKey(String), isKey(String), etc for json
>>> processing may be included here.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> In addition to Generators/Parsers,
>>> (De)SerializationContexts are intended to provide JSONB functionality such
>>> as (de)serialization of arbitrary java types, conversion to/from string of
>>> known types such are Dates or Numbers.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> We could also add some insight into introspected
>>> customization from JSONB annotations based on a Class and property name.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> An example of how implementation of such (de)serializer
>>> may look:
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> public class CrateSerializer implements
>>> JsonbSerializer<Crate> {
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> @Override
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> public void serialize(Crate obj, JsonbGenerator
>>> generator, SerializationContext ctx) {
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> generator.write("crateStr", "REPLACED");
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> ctx.serialize("crateInner", obj.crateInner);
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> ctx.serialize("crateInnerList",
>>> obj.crateInnerList);
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> generator.write("date-converted", dateValue);
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> }
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> }
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> public class CrateDeserializer implements
>>> JsonbDeserializer<Crate> {
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> @Override
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> public Crate deserialize(JsonbParser jsonParser,
>>> DeserializationContext ctx) {
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Crate crate = new Crate();
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> while (jsonParser.hasNext()) {
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> JsonParser.Event next = jsonParser.next();
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> if (next.equals(JsonParser.Event.KEY_NAME) &&
>>> jsonParser.getString().equals("crateInner")) {
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> //invokes JSONB processing for a
>>> CrateInner as a root type with "shared" instance of JsonParser
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> //may invoke other serializer or adapter
>>> instances inside
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> crate.crateInner =
>>> ctx.deserialize(CrateInner.class);
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> next = jsonParser.next();
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> }
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> if (next.equals(JsonParser.Event.KEY_NAME) &&
>>> jsonParser.getString().equals("crateInnerList")) {
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> //invokes JSONB processing for a
>>> List<CrateInner> as a root type with "shared" instance of JsonParser
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> //may invoke other serializer or adapter
>>> instances inside
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> crate.crateInnerList =
>>> ctx.deserialize(new TypeToken<List<CrateInner>>() {});
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> }
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> if (next.equals(JsonParser.Event.KEY_NAME) &&
>>> jsonParser.getString().equals("date-converted")) {
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> jsonParser.next();
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> //don't have context of processing here,
>>> no annotation customizations applied.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Date converted =
>>> ctx.convertDefault(Date.class, jsonParser.getString());
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> crate.date = converted;
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> }
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> }
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> return crate;
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> }
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> }
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> @Romain, this is similar to what you have suggested first
>>> time.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> In addition JsonbAdapters may be used to convert From /
>>> To JsonObject or JsonArray, but auto conversion between unknown JavaTypes
>>> and JsonStructure will not be supported, at least in first version of a
>>> spec.
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> WDYT?
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Roman
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>