Bug #54321 for JSON: allow a per-JSON object to-json converter

Thu Feb 04 14:50:29 2010 rjbs [...] cpan.org - Ticket created

Subject:

allow a per-JSON object to-json converter

I absolutely love JSON.pm. I use it daily, all the time, and it never does anything wrong for me. Thanks! It has only one problem which has bothered me for quite some time, and I would *love* to see it addressed: I would like a way to provide a TO_JSON-like callback to my JSON object. I do not want to create a UNIVERSAL::TO_JSON, as adding methods to UNIVERSAL tends to lead to horrible stupid problems later. Instead, I would like a way to say: ->convert_blessed(1) ->convert_blessed_fallback(sub { ... }); Is this an acceptable proposal? While it would be fantastic if it got coded while I wasn't looking, I would be willing to have a pass at it, if it's something you'd accept. Thanks again for JSON.pm! -- rjbs

Tue Feb 09 23:33:07 2010 makamaka [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added

RT-Send-CC:

makamaka.donzoko [...] gmail.com

On 2010-2月-04 木 14:50:29, RJBS wrote: Show quoted text

> I absolutely love JSON.pm. I use it daily, all the time, and it never > does anything wrong for > me. Thanks! > > It has only one problem which has bothered me for quite some time, and > I would *love* to > see it addressed: I would like a way to provide a TO_JSON-like > callback to my JSON object. I > do not want to create a UNIVERSAL::TO_JSON, as adding methods to > UNIVERSAL tends to lead > to horrible stupid problems later. Instead, I would like a way to > say: > > ->convert_blessed(1) > ->convert_blessed_fallback(sub { ... }); > > Is this an acceptable proposal? While it would be fantastic if it got > coded while I wasn't > looking, I would be willing to have a pass at it, if it's something > you'd accept. > > Thanks again for JSON.pm!

I will accept your proposal. However, I send JSON::XS author this report for XS comptibility. Please wait for a while. Regard,

Tue Feb 09 23:33:08 2010 The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open'

Fri May 14 18:57:40 2010 rjbs [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added

On further reflection, a better interface would be: ->convert_blessed(1) ->convert_blessed_with($method) By default, not supplying the second call would mean $method was TO_JSON. $method could be an alternate method name or a coderef. Things would call $blessed_item->$method. -- rjbs

Fri Jul 13 19:24:52 2012 rjbs [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added

So, I've waited a good while. Any news? :-) -- rjbs

Thu Jan 31 11:31:48 2013 rjbs [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added

On 2012-07-13 19:24:52, RJBS wrote: Show quoted text

> So, I've waited a good while. Any news? :-)

It's been six more months. Would it be productive were I to talk to Marc L about this? -- rjbs

Fri Sep 09 08:31:44 2016 ishigaki [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added

On Fri Feb 01 01:31:48 2013, RJBS wrote: Show quoted text

> On 2012-07-13 19:24:52, RJBS wrote:

> > So, I've waited a good while. Any news? :-)

> > It's been six more months. Would it be productive were I to talk to > Marc L about this?

Hi. Sorry for the way too long silence. Do you still need this feature? Or rather, do you still think of any clear benefits enough to convince Marc (and maybe Reini) when you can get almost the same result with something like this? my $json = do { no warnings qw/once redefine/; local *UNIVERSAL::TO_JSON = sub { ... }; encode_json( $your_data ); }; I understand the beauty, but I'm not so sure if we really need this now when TO_JSON is so widely accepted (even though makamaka said he would accept this proposal). Might it be enough to improve pod with the above example? (note that we'd need something to make -convert_blessed_universally less harmful, and this would be an option. )

Sun Sep 11 11:29:24 2016 rjbs [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added

On 2016-09-09 08:31:44, ISHIGAKI wrote: Show quoted text

> Do you still need this feature?

I can live without it. I just think it is, at the very least, ugly to have part of the configuration for a JSON object stored not in the object, but in UNIVERSAL. -- rjbs

Tue Sep 13 01:06:50 2016 ishigaki [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added

On Mon Sep 12 00:29:24 2016, RJBS wrote: Show quoted text

> On 2016-09-09 08:31:44, ISHIGAKI wrote:

> > Do you still need this feature?

> > I can live without it. I just think it is, at the very least, ugly to > have part of the configuration for a JSON object stored not in the > object, but in UNIVERSAL.

Hmmm. Further investigation revealed a (Cpanel::)JSON::XS object is a blessed scalar reference, though a JSON::PP object is a blessed hash reference. So storing a callback into a JSON.pm object may not be that easy...