JSON stringify values of array - javascript

I'm trying to stringify an object but don't know why it is not working as expected:
function request(url) {
this.url = url;
this.head = [];
}
var r = new request("http://test.com");
r.head["cookie"] = "version=1; skin=new";
r.head["agent"] = "Browser 1.0";
document.write(JSON.stringify(r));
I hope this object can be stringified as:
{"url":"http://test.com","head":["cookie":"version=1; skin=new", "agent":"Browser 1.0"]}
But I only get:
{"url":"http://test.com","head":[]}
How to fix it?

You want the hear property of r to be an associative array I think (like in PHP). They don't exist in JavaScript. Array's have values that are indexed by a number.
Since r.head is an object (array is object in JS) you can add properties to it with r.head["whatever property name"]="value" but these properties don't seem to be serialized to JSON when you use JSON.stringify because r.head is defined as an array and it'll only serialize the numbered index values.
To fix this you can define r.head as an object so JSON.stringify will serialize all properties.
function request(url) {
this.url = url;
this.head = {};
}
var r = new request("http://test.com");
r.head["cookie"] = "version=1; skin=new";
r.head["agent"] = "Browser 1.0";
document.write(JSON.stringify(r));
If you run the following code in your cosole (press F12 in your browser) you'd see that arrays are not serialized in the same way as objects are:
var b = [];
b.something=22
console.log(b.something);
console.log(JSON.stringify(b));//=[]
console.log(b.hasOwnProperty("something"))//=true
b = {};
b.something=22
console.log(b.something);
console.log(JSON.stringify(b));//={"something":22}
console.log(b.hasOwnProperty("something"))//=true

It would be impossible to serialize it the way you are hoping to.
With this object:
function request(url) {
this.url = url;
this.head = [];
}
This variation:
var r = new request("http://test.com");
r.head.push({"cookie": "version=1; skin=new"});
r.head.push({"agent": "Browser 1.0"});
document.write(JSON.stringify(r));
would give you:
{"url":"http://test.com","head":[{"cookie":"version=1; skin=new"},{"agent":"Browser 1.0"}]}
If you were to change the object to:
function request(url) {
this.url = url;
this.head = {};
}
var r = new request("http://test.com");
r.head["cookie"] = "version=1; skin=new";
r.head["agent"] = "Browser 1.0";
document.write(JSON.stringify(r));
would give you:
{"url":"http://test.com","head":{"cookie":"version=1; skin=new","agent":"Browser 1.0"}}
The first variation is guaranteed to give you the head values in order when you iterate it. It also has the advantage in that you can later insert things in specific order if that is of interest.
The second version, by convention, will give you the items back in the order they were inserted as long as there are no number based keys, but that ordering is not guaranteed by the ecma spec.

Related

Reading N-API object into C++ primitive

I've created a simple N-API module starting from the ObjectWrap boilerplate of generator-napi-module, and successfully passed data (an array containing objects with string, number and boolean properties) to JS. However, I'm unable to parse the properties of one of the same objects passed back to the native code; specifically, creating a uint32_t value from a property (a number) of the passed object.
Suppose an array of objects is created and passed to JS:
Napi::Value ObjectWrapAddon::GetSomeList(const Napi::CallbackInfo& info){
Napi::Env env = info.Env();
native_struct_one *data = NULL;
native_struct_two opts = { TRUE,FALSE,FALSE };
int retVal = native_lib_method(&data, &opts);
if(retVal!=OK) {
return Napi::Array::New(env); // return empty array
}
Napi::Array arr = Napi::Array::New(env);
uint32_t i = 0;
do {
Napi::Object tempObj = Napi::Object::New(env);
tempObj.Set("someProp", data->someVal);
arr[i] = tempObj;
i++;
data = data->next;
} while(data);
return arr;
}
Then one of those objects is passed to a native function call:
Napi::Value ObjectWrapAddon::OtherMethod(const Napi::CallbackInfo& info){
Napi::Env env = info.Env();
Napi::Object obj = info[0].As<Napi::Object>();
uint32_t temp = obj.Get("someProp").As<Napi::Number>();
return Napi::Number::New(env, temp);
}
This builds fine, but the above OtherMethod() gives an A number was expected error at uint32_t temp = obj.Get('someProp').As<Napi::Number>().
How would I create a native (C++) value from a JS object property value?
I missed two things, which allow this to work:
I was inconsistent with strings when using Get/Set. If Napi::Object::Set is used with single quotes, single quotes must be used with Napi::Object::Get; likewise for double quotes.
Uint32Value() method needs to be used per the docs (I must have removed this in my tinkering), giving: uint32_t temp = obj.Get("someProp").As<Napi::Number>().Uint32Value();
Fixing these issues provides the expected behavior and output.

Not able to send value to frontend [duplicate]

I must be missing something here, but the following code (Fiddle) returns an empty string:
var test = new Array();
test['a'] = 'test';
test['b'] = 'test b';
var json = JSON.stringify(test);
alert(json);
What is the correct way of JSON'ing this array?
JavaScript arrays are designed to hold data with numeric indexes. You can add named properties to them because an array is a type of object (and this can be useful when you want to store metadata about an array which holds normal, ordered, numerically indexed data), but that isn't what they are designed for.
The JSON array data type cannot have named keys on an array.
When you pass a JavaScript array to JSON.stringify the named properties will be ignored.
If you want named properties, use an Object, not an Array.
const test = {}; // Object
test.a = 'test';
test.b = []; // Array
test.b.push('item');
test.b.push('item2');
test.b.push('item3');
test.b.item4 = "A value"; // Ignored by JSON.stringify
const json = JSON.stringify(test);
console.log(json);
Nice explanation and example above. I found this (JSON.stringify() array bizarreness with Prototype.js) to complete the answer. Some sites implements its own toJSON with JSONFilters, so delete it.
if(window.Prototype) {
delete Object.prototype.toJSON;
delete Array.prototype.toJSON;
delete Hash.prototype.toJSON;
delete String.prototype.toJSON;
}
it works fine and the output of the test:
console.log(json);
Result:
"{"a":"test","b":["item","item2","item3"]}"
I posted a fix for this here
You can use this function to modify JSON.stringify to encode arrays, just post it near the beginning of your script (check the link above for more detail):
// Upgrade for JSON.stringify, updated to allow arrays
(function(){
// Convert array to object
var convArrToObj = function(array){
var thisEleObj = new Object();
if(typeof array == "object"){
for(var i in array){
var thisEle = convArrToObj(array[i]);
thisEleObj[i] = thisEle;
}
}else {
thisEleObj = array;
}
return thisEleObj;
};
var oldJSONStringify = JSON.stringify;
JSON.stringify = function(input){
if(oldJSONStringify(input) == '[]')
return oldJSONStringify(convArrToObj(input));
else
return oldJSONStringify(input);
};
})();
Another approach is the JSON.stringify() replacer function param. You can pass a 2nd arg to JSON.stringify() that has special handling for empty arrays as shown below.
const arr = new Array();
arr.answer = 42;
// {"hello":"world","arr":{"answer":42}}
JSON.stringify({ hello: 'world', arr }, function replacer(key, value) {
if (Array.isArray(value) && value.length === 0) {
return { ...value }; // Converts empty array with string properties into a POJO
}
return value;
});
Alternatively you can use like this
var test = new Array();
test[0]={};
test[0]['a'] = 'test';
test[1]={};
test[1]['b'] = 'test b';
var json = JSON.stringify(test);
alert(json);
Like this you JSON-ing a array.
Json has to have key-value pairs. Tho you can still have an array as the value part. Thus add a "key" of your chousing:
var json = JSON.stringify({whatver: test});

How to load hash in a loop using objects as keys in JavaScript?

I get unexpected behavior when trying to load a hash using objects as keys; ie, when retrieving my data later the hash always refers to the last key used. I would expect this to be due to the behavior of closures, however, I thought that I have done what would be necessary to prevent this:
var hash = {};
var arry = [];
var list = [{val:"a"},{val:"b"},{val:"c"}];
var len = list.length;
dump("load : \n");
for (var i=0;i<len;i++) {
let pos = i;
let obj = list[pos];
hash[obj] = obj.val;
arry.push(obj);
dump(" "+obj.val+" "+hash[obj]+"\n");
}
dump("retrieve : \n");
for (var i=0;i<len;i++) {
let pos = i;
let obj = list[pos];
dump(" "+obj.val+" "+arry[pos].val+" "+hash[obj]+"\n");
}
output is:
load :
a a
b b
c c
retrieve :
a a c
b b c
c c c
I have purposely gone overboard in trying to prevent this by raising the scope of the iteration objects using let, still I am apparently missing something. I would like to understand the reason behind this, and how to prevent it using Javascript.
Object keys in JavaScript can only be strings. This means that if you pass something that is not a string, it gets converted to a string. Since you're using objects that don't "override" Object.toString, they'll all have the same string representation (it's "[object Object]"), which is why the hash always refers to the last key used.
More here: Strange equality issue with Javascript object properties
To extend #Matt Ball answer:
You can use JSON.stringify to string objects.
var a = {};
a.b = 1;
JSON.stringify(a);
// '{"b": 1}'
Note: You can't stringify circular objects:
var a = {};
a.a = a;
JSON.stringify(a);
// TypeError: Converting circular structure to JSON

Hash/associative array using several objects as key

Is there a way of making an associative array where each key is a hash of several objects? I'm not interested in inspecting each object's state, but rather the object's identity.
var myarray = {};
var a = new A();
var b = new B();
var c = new C();
// + is not right, but illustrates the hashing I'm after.
myarray[a + b + c] = 42;
The + operator is not right. In java I would arithmetically combine the System.identityHashCode() for each of these three instances and use the result to make my new hash key. Is there some similar mechanic in javascript?
Overriding the .toString() method in A, B and C is not an option since I'm interested in object identity, not state.
Actually impossible since Object keys in this language only can be strings and there's no equivalent of java's object identity.
:o)
You could overwrite the toString() method of the prototypes to create a unique hash for each instance. E.g.
A.prototype.toString = function() {
return /* something instance specific here */;
};
Even a + b + c would work then.
Update: Afaik, you cannot get an instance unique id (whatever that is) in JavaScript. You could however assign each instance some identifier.
This only works if you are creating the objects.
E.g.
var addIdentityTracker = (function() {
var pad = "0000000000",
id = 1;
function generateId() {
var i = (id++).toString();
return pad.substr(0, 10 - i.length) + i;
}
return function(Constr) {
var new_constr = function() {
this.___uid = generateId();
Constr.apply(this, arguments);
};
new_constr.prototype = Constr.prototype;
new_constr.prototype.toString = function() {
return this.___uid;
};
return new_constr;
};
}());
and then do:
A = addIdentityTracker(A);
var a = new A();
I'd suggest just assigning a unique ID to each object. Javascript doesn't come with a built-in unique ID mechanism, but you can assign a unique ID to any object you want and then use it as such. For example, you could do this:
// getUniqueID is a function that returns a unique ID for any javascript object.
// If no uniqueID is already present on the object, it coins one using a global
// counter and then stores it on the object.
// So that the uniqueID can be combined with other uniqueIDs easily and still
// create a unique union, the uniqueID here is a unique 10 character string.
// There is no randomness in the IDs as they are only required to be unique
// within the page, not random or unique in the universe. The monotomically
// increasing counter guarantees uniqueness within the page.
// Two globals we need for generating the unique ID
var idCntr = 0;
var controlStr = "0000000000"; // 10 digits long
function getUniqueID(o) {
if (!o.uniqueID) {
var base = idCntr++ + ""; // get string version of idCntr
o.uniqueID = controlStr.slice(0, controlStr.length - base.length) + base; // zero pad
}
return(o.uniqueID);
}
var myobj = {};
var a = new A();
var b = new B();
var c = new C();
myobj[getUniqueID(a) + getUniqueID(b) + getUniqueID(c)] = 42;
For you to fetch the same object back in the future, you'd have to combine the objects in the proper order again. If that wasn't easy, then you could make sure and always combine them in numeric order with the lowest numbers first so you always got a consistent order.

Change key in js associative array

If I have:
var myArray = new Array();
myArray['hello'] = value;
How can I change the key 'hello' to something else?
Something like this would work.
var from = 'hello',
to = 'world',
i, value = myArray[from];
for( i in myArray )
if( i == from ) myArray.splice( i, 1 );
myArray[to] = value;
But is there a native function or a better way to do it?
edit:
Due to the lack of associative arrays in js, what I want to do modify the property name of an object as efficiently as possible.
In JavaScript there is no such thing as associative Array. Objects can be used instead:
var myHash = new Object();
or
var myHash = {};
replace can be done like this:
myHash["from"] = "value";
myHash["to"] = myHash["from"];
delete myHash["from"];
but the preferred way to write it:
myHash.from = "value";
myHash.to = myHash.from;
delete myHash.from;
You can't really "change" the property name, but you can always assign a property value to a new name, and then delete the original one.
myArray['world'] = myArray.hello;
delete myArray.hello;
Also, you're working with an Array instance but using it as a simple object; everything you're doing would work just as well with:
var myArray = {};
The "splice()" you're attempting in the code posted won't work, because it's only for the actual integer-indexed array properties, and not the named properties.
That "delete" doesn't really delete a property really doesn't matter. The "undefined" value is what you get when you check an object for a property and there's no such property.

Categories

Resources