Change json serialization to Jackson #46
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Patrick Adamek <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Patrick Adamek <[email protected]>
codekonzept
force-pushed
the
feature/jackson-migration
branch
from
60bfa53 to
4d74de1
Compare
Signed-off-by: Patrick Adamek <[email protected]>
codekonzept
force-pushed
the
feature/jackson-migration
branch
from
4e140c5 to
6657438
Compare
| @Test | ||
| @Ignore | ||
| public void canSerializeOptionals() { | ||
| // assertEquals("{\"myOpt\":\"test\",\"next\":null}", JsonSerialization.serialized(new MyOptional(Optional.of("test"), Optional.empty()))); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Different serialization output
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How's it different?
If it's something like spaces between elements, then perhaps we need custom assertions in order to normalise messages before comparing them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
One serializer just serializes a given value or null whereas the other serializer uses a sub-structure with a value field for that. Therefore the structures are different and one can't just deserialize the output of one with the other. This results in a compatibility problem. If one starts from scratch this does not seem to be a problem.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Makes sense. What's the impact of changed behaviour on end-users?
By the way, are we keeping both serializers? If that's the case it might be a good idea to have a common base test case for both. Differences between implementations could be put into specific test case implementations.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @codekonzept and @jakzal !
I really like the idea of isolating differences in tests.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jakzal: I think it boils down to if we want to be backward compatible or not. If we want to be, leaving it how it is now results in not being able to deserialize existing objects. This is a no go. If we just want to give another serializer option this would be the way to go.
@VaughnVernon + @jakzal: i will work on separating the tests so that the differences in serializing optionals become more obvious.
| public class JsonSerializationTest { | ||
|
|
||
| void executeJsonTest(Runnable assertFunction){ | ||
| JsonSerialization.setEngine(new JacksonJsonSerialization()); |
No description provided.