polygene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Niclas Hedhman <nic...@hedhman.org>
Subject Re: ZEST-23
Date Thu, 21 May 2015 09:28:44 GMT
Kent,
good to know someone has JS experience... ;-)

So, iterating response in

$.getJSON( "abc.json", null, function ( response )
{

} );

without knowing the structure, is not an issue?


For data preservation, I think the existing Migration mechanism can be
used. I need to refresh my memory...

// Niclas

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Kent SĂžlvsten <kent.soelvsten@gmail.com>
wrote:

> In javascript a map is simply a different way of accessing the r/w the
> properties of an object.
>
> var map = {};
> map["FirstName"] = ''Niclas";
> map["LastName"] = "Hedhman";
> var keys = Object.keys(map);  // ['Firstname', 'LastName']
>
> ending up as
>
> map : {
>     "FirstName" : "Niclas",
>     "LastName" : "Hedhman"
> }
> when serialized as JSon.
>
> So i would say that the second form is definitely the "natural" one.
>
> Could the implementation of migrations for stored data, possibly
> combined with specifying some sort of "protocol version" be of some use?
>
> /Kent
>
>
>
> Den 21-05-2015 kl. 10:37 skrev Niclas Hedhman:
> > I have been looking at this issue and I wonder if there are any notes
> from
> > the original implementation...
> >
> > For instance, a regular Map is serialized to
> > map: [
> >     { "key" : "FirstName", "value" : "Niclas" },
> >     { "key" : "LastName", "value" : "Hedhman" }
> > ]
> > but it could have been made;
> >
> > map : {
> >     "FirstName" : "Niclas",
> >     "LastName" : "Hedhman"
> > }
> >
> > My guess is that there is "schema" reasons for this. Also, it is not
> > something that can now be changed, at least not without adding built-in
> > handing of old format (which is a possibility).
> >
> > One of the usecases of this outside of the storage, would be using this
> > serialization SPI for the toValue() and toEntity() methods, in which case
> > the serialization would end up being processable in JavaScript.
> >
> > So, in that case, would it makes more sense to have "key"/"value", or to
> > have Maps showing up as objects?? I am not that fluent in JavaScript to
> > have an opinion. I can imagine that having the second/object form, is
> neat
> > when one knows what is coming over the wire, but could messy to iterate
> as
> > built-in attributes need to be filtered out. Or?
> >
> >
> > // Niclas
> >
> > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:55 AM, Niclas Hedhman <niclas@hedhman.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Jiri,
> >> thanks for your analysis of why it breaks.
> >>
> >> I assume that a JSON Object for NamedAssociation is the correct path
> >> forward,
> >>
> >> {
> >>     "left" : "723470239476",
> >>     "right" : "109874275692"
> >> }
> >>
> >> instead of the JSON Array which needs inner objects in that case,
> >>
> >> [
> >>     { "left" : "723470239476" },
> >>     { "right" : "109874275692" }
> >> ]
> >>
> >> Paul, your thoughts?
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> --
> >> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
> >> http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
> >>
> >
> >
>
>


-- 
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message