Add JSON serializability to new specs #1035
Labels
area/core
Related to core module: events, entities, clients, specs
enhancement
Improvement over an existing feature
help wanted
Contributors welcome!
Milestone
Comments
NovaFox161
added
enhancement
|
Looking into this after quite a while 😓 . Most specs could have their @JsonSerialize(as = XSpec.class)
@JsonDeserialize(as = XSpec.class)Some considerations must be taken regarding
|
|
EDIT: Stupid me, I just realized that discord4j's json module already has a custom serializer/deserializer for possibles. I wrote my own for nothing. I was looking at this for a bit I used ObjectMapper to convert between classes and JSON. ObjectMapper is part of json-databind, which is visible to discord4j's json module, but not to the core module that all of the specs are located in right now. Anyways, I ran into, like, two problems:
I did do a bit of modification to a local copy of D4J, doing what @quanticc suggested with the JsonSerialize, JsonDeserialize, and JsonIgnore annotations. So the following code likely would not work with an actual current release of D4J. The generated JSON is insanely long. Probably not practical And then you can convert it back into the spec Overall, I ended up with something like this public class Main {
public static void main(String[] args) {
// I just copied this from the D4J docs
MessageCreateSpec spec = MessageCreateSpec.create()
.withContent("Hey")
.withComponents(ActionRow.of(Button.success("hey", "Click me!")));
// The actual interesting part
ObjectMapper objectMapper = JsonMapper.builder()
.disable(MapperFeature.AUTO_DETECT_IS_GETTERS)
.disable(SerializationFeature.FAIL_ON_EMPTY_BEANS)
.build();
SimpleModule module = new SimpleModule();
module.addSerializer(Possible.class, new PossibleSerializer());
module.addDeserializer(Possible.class, new PossibleDeserializer());
objectMapper.registerModule(module);
String serialized = null;
try {
serialized = objectMapper.writeValueAsString(spec);
System.out.println(serialized);
System.out.println(objectMapper.readValue(serialized, MessageCreateSpec.class));
} catch (JsonProcessingException e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
}
}// "Possible" has to be kept as a rawtype. The compiler will complain if you do "Possible<?>"
public class PossibleDeserializer extends JsonDeserializer<Possible> {
@Override
public Possible deserialize(JsonParser jsonParser, DeserializationContext deserializationContext) throws IOException, JacksonException {
JsonNode node = jsonParser.getCodec().readTree(jsonParser);
boolean present = node.get("present").asBoolean();
if (present) {
JsonNode value = node.get("value");
String className = node.get("cls").asText();
try {
Class<?> cls = Class.forName(className);
return Possible.of(jsonParser.getCodec().treeToValue(value, cls));
} catch (ClassNotFoundException e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
} else {
return Possible.absent();
}
}
}public class PossibleSerializer extends JsonSerializer<Possible> {
@Override
public void serialize(Possible possible, JsonGenerator jsonGenerator, SerializerProvider serializerProvider) throws IOException {
jsonGenerator.writeStartObject();
jsonGenerator.writeBooleanField("present", !possible.isAbsent());
if (!possible.isAbsent()) {
jsonGenerator.writeObjectField("cls", possible.get().getClass().getName());
jsonGenerator.writeObjectField("value", possible.get());
}
jsonGenerator.writeEndObject();
}
}Right now I just have the code in it's own project because it was easier to test that way. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Feature Description:
Currently, there is no supported way to serialize the new specs into JSON and deserialize them back from JSON.
Example use case: (Embed pagination)
EmbedCreateSpecinstances and stored in a persistence layer.Justification:
Besides supporting the above use case, Legacy specs already have this functionality and it should be ported over to the new specs.
LegacySpec#asRequestLegacyXSpec#from(XData)methods.The new specs could implement this same behavior, or something else entirely. However, it would be nice to add this functionality before Legacy specs are removed.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: