Explicitly parse JSON string vs JSON.deserializeJSON and escaped double quoteParse nested JSONJSON parsing to Visualforce page difficultiesDefault values for Wrapper variables not setConvert date in JSON to Date from StringMethod does not exist or incorrect signature: void parse(String) from the type or_propertyJSONTestHow to parse JSON String through apexDeserializing/Parsing the JSON response to an Apex classJson2apex - Message consuming unrecognized propertyParse JSON using APEX provided JSON Methods
Is GOCE a satellite or aircraft?
What does "rf" mean in "rfkill"?
Do I have to worry about players making “bad” choices on level up?
A non-technological, repeating, visible object in the sky, holding its position in the sky for hours
Did Henry V’s archers at Agincourt fight with no pants / breeches on because of dysentery?
How to stop co-workers from teasing me because I know Russian?
Examples of non trivial equivalence relations , I mean equivalence relations without the expression " same ... as" in their definition?
Is it possible to measure lightning discharges as Nikola Tesla?
Why does Bran Stark feel that Jon Snow "needs to know" about his lineage?
Transfer over $10k
Phrase for the opposite of "foolproof"
Pulling the rope with one hand is as heavy as with two hands?
Confusion about capacitors
Stark VS Thanos
Unexpected email from Yorkshire Bank
Is it possible to Ready a spell to be cast just before the start of your next turn by having the trigger be an ally's attack?
Options leqno, reqno for documentclass or exist another option?
How can Republicans who favour free markets, consistently express anger when they don't like the outcome of that choice?
Why do Ichisongas hate elephants and hippos?
Historically, were women trained for obligatory wars? Or did they serve some other military function?
Is thermodynamics only applicable to systems in equilibrium?
How to figure out whether the data is sample data or population data apart from the client's information?
Please, smoke with good manners
What does YCWCYODFTRFDTY mean?
Explicitly parse JSON string vs JSON.deserialize
JSON and escaped double quoteParse nested JSONJSON parsing to Visualforce page difficultiesDefault values for Wrapper variables not setConvert date in JSON to Date from StringMethod does not exist or incorrect signature: void parse(String) from the type or_propertyJSONTestHow to parse JSON String through apexDeserializing/Parsing the JSON response to an Apex classJson2apex - Message consuming unrecognized propertyParse JSON using APEX provided JSON Methods
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
The JSON2Apex web tool offers 2 methods of parsing of the JSON string: one uses JSON.deserialize method, and the other creates parser and iterates over the input json. The second option can be enabled by checking "Create explicit parse code" in the tool.
QUESTION
In what cases would a developer prefer explicit parsing
to a simple JSON.deserialize
? If we compare both options the later seems to be much clear and less verbose which makes code more readable.
Explicit parsing
public class JSON2Apex
public class User
public String name get;set;
public String twitter get;set;
public User(JSONParser parser)
while (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.END_OBJECT)
if (parser.getCurrentToken() == System.JSONToken.FIELD_NAME)
String text = parser.getText();
if (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.VALUE_NULL)
if (text == 'name')
name = parser.getText();
else if (text == 'twitter')
twitter = parser.getText();
else
System.debug(LoggingLevel.WARN, 'User consuming unrecognized property: '+text);
consumeObject(parser);
public User user get;set;
public JSON2Apex(JSONParser parser)
while (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.END_OBJECT)
if (parser.getCurrentToken() == System.JSONToken.FIELD_NAME)
String text = parser.getText();
if (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.VALUE_NULL)
if (text == 'user')
user = new User(parser);
else
System.debug(LoggingLevel.WARN, 'JSON2Apex consuming unrecognized property: '+text);
consumeObject(parser);
public static JSON2Apex parse(String json)
System.JSONParser parser = System.JSON.createParser(json);
return new JSON2Apex(parser);
public static void consumeObject(System.JSONParser parser)
Integer depth = 0;
do
curr == System.JSONToken.START_ARRAY)
depth++;
else if (curr == System.JSONToken.END_OBJECT while (depth > 0 && parser.nextToken() != null);
JSON.deserialize
public class JSON2Apex
public class User
public String name;
public String twitter;
public User user;
public static JSON2Apex parse(String json)
return (JSON2Apex) System.JSON.deserialize(json, JSON2Apex.class);
json parsing
add a comment |
The JSON2Apex web tool offers 2 methods of parsing of the JSON string: one uses JSON.deserialize method, and the other creates parser and iterates over the input json. The second option can be enabled by checking "Create explicit parse code" in the tool.
QUESTION
In what cases would a developer prefer explicit parsing
to a simple JSON.deserialize
? If we compare both options the later seems to be much clear and less verbose which makes code more readable.
Explicit parsing
public class JSON2Apex
public class User
public String name get;set;
public String twitter get;set;
public User(JSONParser parser)
while (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.END_OBJECT)
if (parser.getCurrentToken() == System.JSONToken.FIELD_NAME)
String text = parser.getText();
if (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.VALUE_NULL)
if (text == 'name')
name = parser.getText();
else if (text == 'twitter')
twitter = parser.getText();
else
System.debug(LoggingLevel.WARN, 'User consuming unrecognized property: '+text);
consumeObject(parser);
public User user get;set;
public JSON2Apex(JSONParser parser)
while (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.END_OBJECT)
if (parser.getCurrentToken() == System.JSONToken.FIELD_NAME)
String text = parser.getText();
if (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.VALUE_NULL)
if (text == 'user')
user = new User(parser);
else
System.debug(LoggingLevel.WARN, 'JSON2Apex consuming unrecognized property: '+text);
consumeObject(parser);
public static JSON2Apex parse(String json)
System.JSONParser parser = System.JSON.createParser(json);
return new JSON2Apex(parser);
public static void consumeObject(System.JSONParser parser)
Integer depth = 0;
do
curr == System.JSONToken.START_ARRAY)
depth++;
else if (curr == System.JSONToken.END_OBJECT while (depth > 0 && parser.nextToken() != null);
JSON.deserialize
public class JSON2Apex
public class User
public String name;
public String twitter;
public User user;
public static JSON2Apex parse(String json)
return (JSON2Apex) System.JSON.deserialize(json, JSON2Apex.class);
json parsing
add a comment |
The JSON2Apex web tool offers 2 methods of parsing of the JSON string: one uses JSON.deserialize method, and the other creates parser and iterates over the input json. The second option can be enabled by checking "Create explicit parse code" in the tool.
QUESTION
In what cases would a developer prefer explicit parsing
to a simple JSON.deserialize
? If we compare both options the later seems to be much clear and less verbose which makes code more readable.
Explicit parsing
public class JSON2Apex
public class User
public String name get;set;
public String twitter get;set;
public User(JSONParser parser)
while (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.END_OBJECT)
if (parser.getCurrentToken() == System.JSONToken.FIELD_NAME)
String text = parser.getText();
if (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.VALUE_NULL)
if (text == 'name')
name = parser.getText();
else if (text == 'twitter')
twitter = parser.getText();
else
System.debug(LoggingLevel.WARN, 'User consuming unrecognized property: '+text);
consumeObject(parser);
public User user get;set;
public JSON2Apex(JSONParser parser)
while (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.END_OBJECT)
if (parser.getCurrentToken() == System.JSONToken.FIELD_NAME)
String text = parser.getText();
if (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.VALUE_NULL)
if (text == 'user')
user = new User(parser);
else
System.debug(LoggingLevel.WARN, 'JSON2Apex consuming unrecognized property: '+text);
consumeObject(parser);
public static JSON2Apex parse(String json)
System.JSONParser parser = System.JSON.createParser(json);
return new JSON2Apex(parser);
public static void consumeObject(System.JSONParser parser)
Integer depth = 0;
do
curr == System.JSONToken.START_ARRAY)
depth++;
else if (curr == System.JSONToken.END_OBJECT while (depth > 0 && parser.nextToken() != null);
JSON.deserialize
public class JSON2Apex
public class User
public String name;
public String twitter;
public User user;
public static JSON2Apex parse(String json)
return (JSON2Apex) System.JSON.deserialize(json, JSON2Apex.class);
json parsing
The JSON2Apex web tool offers 2 methods of parsing of the JSON string: one uses JSON.deserialize method, and the other creates parser and iterates over the input json. The second option can be enabled by checking "Create explicit parse code" in the tool.
QUESTION
In what cases would a developer prefer explicit parsing
to a simple JSON.deserialize
? If we compare both options the later seems to be much clear and less verbose which makes code more readable.
Explicit parsing
public class JSON2Apex
public class User
public String name get;set;
public String twitter get;set;
public User(JSONParser parser)
while (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.END_OBJECT)
if (parser.getCurrentToken() == System.JSONToken.FIELD_NAME)
String text = parser.getText();
if (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.VALUE_NULL)
if (text == 'name')
name = parser.getText();
else if (text == 'twitter')
twitter = parser.getText();
else
System.debug(LoggingLevel.WARN, 'User consuming unrecognized property: '+text);
consumeObject(parser);
public User user get;set;
public JSON2Apex(JSONParser parser)
while (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.END_OBJECT)
if (parser.getCurrentToken() == System.JSONToken.FIELD_NAME)
String text = parser.getText();
if (parser.nextToken() != System.JSONToken.VALUE_NULL)
if (text == 'user')
user = new User(parser);
else
System.debug(LoggingLevel.WARN, 'JSON2Apex consuming unrecognized property: '+text);
consumeObject(parser);
public static JSON2Apex parse(String json)
System.JSONParser parser = System.JSON.createParser(json);
return new JSON2Apex(parser);
public static void consumeObject(System.JSONParser parser)
Integer depth = 0;
do
curr == System.JSONToken.START_ARRAY)
depth++;
else if (curr == System.JSONToken.END_OBJECT while (depth > 0 && parser.nextToken() != null);
JSON.deserialize
public class JSON2Apex
public class User
public String name;
public String twitter;
public User user;
public static JSON2Apex parse(String json)
return (JSON2Apex) System.JSON.deserialize(json, JSON2Apex.class);
json parsing
json parsing
asked Apr 9 at 7:20
EduardEduard
1,9172725
1,9172725
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Apex code has reserved names (keywords) and special variable rules (e.g. cannot start with a number, can't have __
, etc) that you can't use in JSON objects. You don't want to use explicit mode if you can help it, because it has worse performance compared to JSON.deserialize, but it gets around compilation errors if you have a JSON string like:
"title": "Writing JSON", "abstract": "A short document about how to use JSON."
This would compile to:
public class JSON2Apex
public String title;
public String abstract;
But abstract is a reserved keyword. You can't deploy this code to Salesforce. By changing the code:
public class JSON2Apex
public String title;
public String abstract_x;
The code can then compile, but you need explicit parsing in order to translate abstract
in the JSON string to abstract_x
in Apex.
Thanks for your prompt answer! If this is the only reason why a developer would use explicit parsing, then I would definitely go with deserialize all the time. It's possible to keep a Map of reserved words and their substitutes, and perform replace in the input json string before parsing. This is exaclty how the ffhttp_JsonDeserializer.cls class works.
– Eduard
Apr 9 at 7:56
1
@Eduard Yes, there are better ways. JSON2Apex is a rather old utility, useful in most cases, but explicit mode wasn't the best idea. There's definitely better ways to do it.
– sfdcfox
Apr 9 at 7:59
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "459"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsalesforce.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f257118%2fexplicitly-parse-json-string-vs-json-deserialize%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Apex code has reserved names (keywords) and special variable rules (e.g. cannot start with a number, can't have __
, etc) that you can't use in JSON objects. You don't want to use explicit mode if you can help it, because it has worse performance compared to JSON.deserialize, but it gets around compilation errors if you have a JSON string like:
"title": "Writing JSON", "abstract": "A short document about how to use JSON."
This would compile to:
public class JSON2Apex
public String title;
public String abstract;
But abstract is a reserved keyword. You can't deploy this code to Salesforce. By changing the code:
public class JSON2Apex
public String title;
public String abstract_x;
The code can then compile, but you need explicit parsing in order to translate abstract
in the JSON string to abstract_x
in Apex.
Thanks for your prompt answer! If this is the only reason why a developer would use explicit parsing, then I would definitely go with deserialize all the time. It's possible to keep a Map of reserved words and their substitutes, and perform replace in the input json string before parsing. This is exaclty how the ffhttp_JsonDeserializer.cls class works.
– Eduard
Apr 9 at 7:56
1
@Eduard Yes, there are better ways. JSON2Apex is a rather old utility, useful in most cases, but explicit mode wasn't the best idea. There's definitely better ways to do it.
– sfdcfox
Apr 9 at 7:59
add a comment |
Apex code has reserved names (keywords) and special variable rules (e.g. cannot start with a number, can't have __
, etc) that you can't use in JSON objects. You don't want to use explicit mode if you can help it, because it has worse performance compared to JSON.deserialize, but it gets around compilation errors if you have a JSON string like:
"title": "Writing JSON", "abstract": "A short document about how to use JSON."
This would compile to:
public class JSON2Apex
public String title;
public String abstract;
But abstract is a reserved keyword. You can't deploy this code to Salesforce. By changing the code:
public class JSON2Apex
public String title;
public String abstract_x;
The code can then compile, but you need explicit parsing in order to translate abstract
in the JSON string to abstract_x
in Apex.
Thanks for your prompt answer! If this is the only reason why a developer would use explicit parsing, then I would definitely go with deserialize all the time. It's possible to keep a Map of reserved words and their substitutes, and perform replace in the input json string before parsing. This is exaclty how the ffhttp_JsonDeserializer.cls class works.
– Eduard
Apr 9 at 7:56
1
@Eduard Yes, there are better ways. JSON2Apex is a rather old utility, useful in most cases, but explicit mode wasn't the best idea. There's definitely better ways to do it.
– sfdcfox
Apr 9 at 7:59
add a comment |
Apex code has reserved names (keywords) and special variable rules (e.g. cannot start with a number, can't have __
, etc) that you can't use in JSON objects. You don't want to use explicit mode if you can help it, because it has worse performance compared to JSON.deserialize, but it gets around compilation errors if you have a JSON string like:
"title": "Writing JSON", "abstract": "A short document about how to use JSON."
This would compile to:
public class JSON2Apex
public String title;
public String abstract;
But abstract is a reserved keyword. You can't deploy this code to Salesforce. By changing the code:
public class JSON2Apex
public String title;
public String abstract_x;
The code can then compile, but you need explicit parsing in order to translate abstract
in the JSON string to abstract_x
in Apex.
Apex code has reserved names (keywords) and special variable rules (e.g. cannot start with a number, can't have __
, etc) that you can't use in JSON objects. You don't want to use explicit mode if you can help it, because it has worse performance compared to JSON.deserialize, but it gets around compilation errors if you have a JSON string like:
"title": "Writing JSON", "abstract": "A short document about how to use JSON."
This would compile to:
public class JSON2Apex
public String title;
public String abstract;
But abstract is a reserved keyword. You can't deploy this code to Salesforce. By changing the code:
public class JSON2Apex
public String title;
public String abstract_x;
The code can then compile, but you need explicit parsing in order to translate abstract
in the JSON string to abstract_x
in Apex.
answered Apr 9 at 7:38
sfdcfoxsfdcfox
267k13213461
267k13213461
Thanks for your prompt answer! If this is the only reason why a developer would use explicit parsing, then I would definitely go with deserialize all the time. It's possible to keep a Map of reserved words and their substitutes, and perform replace in the input json string before parsing. This is exaclty how the ffhttp_JsonDeserializer.cls class works.
– Eduard
Apr 9 at 7:56
1
@Eduard Yes, there are better ways. JSON2Apex is a rather old utility, useful in most cases, but explicit mode wasn't the best idea. There's definitely better ways to do it.
– sfdcfox
Apr 9 at 7:59
add a comment |
Thanks for your prompt answer! If this is the only reason why a developer would use explicit parsing, then I would definitely go with deserialize all the time. It's possible to keep a Map of reserved words and their substitutes, and perform replace in the input json string before parsing. This is exaclty how the ffhttp_JsonDeserializer.cls class works.
– Eduard
Apr 9 at 7:56
1
@Eduard Yes, there are better ways. JSON2Apex is a rather old utility, useful in most cases, but explicit mode wasn't the best idea. There's definitely better ways to do it.
– sfdcfox
Apr 9 at 7:59
Thanks for your prompt answer! If this is the only reason why a developer would use explicit parsing, then I would definitely go with deserialize all the time. It's possible to keep a Map of reserved words and their substitutes, and perform replace in the input json string before parsing. This is exaclty how the ffhttp_JsonDeserializer.cls class works.
– Eduard
Apr 9 at 7:56
Thanks for your prompt answer! If this is the only reason why a developer would use explicit parsing, then I would definitely go with deserialize all the time. It's possible to keep a Map of reserved words and their substitutes, and perform replace in the input json string before parsing. This is exaclty how the ffhttp_JsonDeserializer.cls class works.
– Eduard
Apr 9 at 7:56
1
1
@Eduard Yes, there are better ways. JSON2Apex is a rather old utility, useful in most cases, but explicit mode wasn't the best idea. There's definitely better ways to do it.
– sfdcfox
Apr 9 at 7:59
@Eduard Yes, there are better ways. JSON2Apex is a rather old utility, useful in most cases, but explicit mode wasn't the best idea. There's definitely better ways to do it.
– sfdcfox
Apr 9 at 7:59
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Salesforce Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsalesforce.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f257118%2fexplicitly-parse-json-string-vs-json-deserialize%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown