Explicitly parse JSON string vs JSON.deserialize The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) 2019 Moderator Election Q&A - Question Collection 2019 Moderator Election Q&A - Questionnaire 2019 Community Moderator Election ResultsJSON 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
How do spell lists change if the party levels up without taking a long rest?
University's motivation for having tenure-track positions
What can I do if neighbor is blocking my solar panels intentionally?
Why can't devices on different VLANs, but on the same subnet, communicate?
Is it ok to offer lower paid work as a trial period before negotiating for a full-time job?
Are spiders unable to hurt humans, especially very small spiders?
What do I do when my TA workload is more than expected?
ELI5: Why do they say that Israel would have been the fourth country to land a spacecraft on the Moon and why do they call it low cost?
How do I design a circuit to convert a 100 mV and 50 Hz sine wave to a square wave?
Do ℕ, mathbbN, BbbN, symbbN effectively differ, and is there a "canonical" specification of the naturals?
Homework question about an engine pulling a train
Python - Fishing Simulator
Student Loan from years ago pops up and is taking my salary
How to read αἱμύλιος or when to aspirate
Can the Right Ascension and Argument of Perigee of a spacecraft's orbit keep varying by themselves with time?
My body leaves; my core can stay
What is the role of 'For' here?
Am I ethically obligated to go into work on an off day if the reason is sudden?
Windows 10: How to Lock (not sleep) laptop on lid close?
Example of compact Riemannian manifold with only one geodesic.
What to do when moving next to a bird sanctuary with a loosely-domesticated cat?
How did the audience guess the pentatonic scale in Bobby McFerrin's presentation?
Do warforged have souls?
Deal with toxic manager when you can't quit
Explicitly parse JSON string vs JSON.deserialize
The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)
2019 Moderator Election Q&A - Question Collection
2019 Moderator Election Q&A - Questionnaire
2019 Community Moderator Election ResultsJSON 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.END_ARRAY)
depth--;
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.END_ARRAY)
depth--;
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.END_ARRAY)
depth--;
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.END_ARRAY)
depth--;
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
1,9022723
1,9022723
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
265k13211458
265k13211458
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