March 2019 - Pharo-users - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-users] How to write out simple Json?

by Tim Mackinnon

> On 1 Mar 2019, at 10:35, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > > Forget about the way you are trying to implement it, to what would > > { #key->#value. 1. true } > > be rendered in JSON ? > > { "key":"value", 1, true } > > or > > [ "key":"value", 1, true ] > > Both are illegal JSON. You didnât read what I said - with those 2 tiny changes - both of those given an exception just like STONJSON - the only difference is that I donât have to put asDictionary everywhere. Anyway - I think Iâve learned a lot from this discussion - and as Pharo is malleable I can do my little nasty subclass until I get burned and then I will probably adopt a proper Config object like Henrik mentioned ;) Just as a small additional question - when you do : ex := { #track->#pharo. #language->#smalltalk. #exercises->{ #slug->'hello'. #id->55. #topics->#('a' 'b' 'c') } asDictionary } asDictionary. Am I right in thinking that with asDictionary the order wonât be deterministic (which is valid for JSON dictionaries, but annoying for diffing config files). This is why I was doing asOrderedDictionary as I though I had seen it change on me a few times when I was generating output. Tim

March 1, 2019

Re: [Pharo-users] Interval form: x to: y when x > y - or how to count down...

by Tim Mackinnon

Actually thats quite a good suggestion - it probably should have been: #upTo: #downTo: #to:by: In the first place (but Iâm guessing this change will never happen) > On 1 Mar 2019, at 05:35, K K Subbu <kksubbu.ml(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On 28/02/19 6:33 PM, Tim Mackinnon wrote: >> So I would expect â1 to: 0â to see: >> 1 -> 1 >> 2 -> 0. > > It is difficult for code to guess the intent of the coder. Did the coder intend an decreasing sequence or a stopping condition (i == end or i > end?). Perhaps, we could use an explicit selector: > > 5 downto: 1 > > to disambiguate between the two cases. > > Regards .. Subbu >

March 1, 2019

Re: [Pharo-users] How to write out simple Json?

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

> On 28 Feb 2019, at 22:35, Tim Mackinnon <tim(a)testit.works> wrote: > > Sven- thinking a bit more > >> On 28 Feb 2019, at 13:59, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >> >> This is wrong !! >> >> Think about it, what would then happen with a mixed list ? >> >> { #key->#value. 1. true } >> >> That would generate invalid JSON. > > > I actually went and tried my little hack with your example and it gives the same error as STONWriter - so actually my proposal isnât so horrid as inferredâ¦ (but still not as knowledgable as everyone else on this for sure). Forget about the way you are trying to implement it, to what would { #key->#value. 1. true } be rendered in JSON ? { "key":"value", 1, true } or [ "key":"value", 1, true ] Both are illegal JSON.

March 1, 2019

Re: [Pharo-users] How to write out simple Json?

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

I would use any of the following: ex := { #track->#pharo. #language->#smalltalk. #exercises->{ #slug->'hello'. #id->55. #topics->#('a' 'b' 'c') } asDictionary } asDictionary. ex := { #track->#pharo. #language->#smalltalk. #exercises->({ #slug->'hello'. #id->55. #topics->#('a' 'b' 'c') } as: NeoJSONObject) } as: NeoJSONObject. ex := NeoJSONObject new track: #pharo; language: #smalltalk; exercises: (NeoJSONObject new slug: 'hello'; id: 55; topics: #('a' 'b' 'c')). > On 1 Mar 2019, at 05:01, Jimmie Houchin <jlhouchin(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I don't know if you really need OrderedDictionary or not. But I am a big fan of and use all the time simple Arrays or OrderedCollection of pairs. It is neat, clean and readable. > > ex := Dictionary newFromPairs: { > 'track'. 'pharo. > 'language'. 'smalltalk'. > 'exercises'. Dictionary newFromPairs: { > 'slug'. 'hello'. > 'id'. 55. > 'topics'. #('a' 'b' 'c')} > > In my app each individual level creates its own Dictionaries. > > I don't if such would be applicable for you. > > I have methods at each level which start like below. I don't know ahead of time whether or not I am receiving a Dictionary or an Array. I use this extensively for configuration that is readable and compact. I prefer this to the above when possible. And prefer pairs to associations. To my eyes it is cleaner. > > config := { > 'track'. 'pharo. > 'language'. 'smalltalk'. > 'exercises'. { > 'slug'. 'hello'. > 'id'. 55. > 'topics'. #('a' 'b' 'c')} > > myMethod: config > confd := config isDictionary > ifTrue: [ config ] > ifFalse: [ Dictionary newFromPairs: config ]. > ... > > I use this also for JSON as I am using a REST API which receives JSON objects but it is also easy to pass in the necessary key:value pairs to the ZnClient. > > I don't know if this is of any value. But it is something I do extensively and pervasively in my app. I spent a lot of time thinking and iterating on how to handle large, complex, and nested configurations and enable them to be as clean, neat and concise as possible without limiting them in any foreseeable manner. > > Jimmie > > > > On 2/28/19 7:45 AM, Tim Mackinnon wrote: >> Just to add more flavour to this - it seems quite wordy that we have to do this (or equivalent) to write some config. >> >> ex := OrderedDictionary new >> at: 'track' put: 'pharo'; >> at: 'language' put: 'smalltalk'; >> at: 'exercises' put: ( >> OrderedDictionary new >> at: 'slug' put: 'hello'; >> at: 'id' put: 55; >> at: 'topics' put: #('a' 'b' 'c'); >> yourself ); >> yourself. >> >> String streamContents: [ :stream | >> (NeoJSONWriter on: (stream)) prettyPrint: true; >> mapInstVarsFor: Association; >> nextPut: ex ]. >> >> So Iâm still wondering the NeoJSONObjectMapping can do something easy for Association other than simply mapInstVars? >> >> >>> On 28 Feb 2019, at 13:36, Tim Mackinnon <tim(a)testit.works> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Sven - is there no convenience shortcut we can use in our code to make this less wordy when we are specifying it? >>> >>> E.g. the following is very convenient to write - but doesnât work (as you have $â and not $â ) >>> >>> ex := { 'track'-> 'pharo'. >>> 'language' -> 'smalltalk'. >>> 'exercises' -> >>> {'slug' -> 'hello'. >>> 'id' -> 55. >>> 'topics' -> #('a' 'b' 'c') } >>> }. >>> >>> String streamContents: [ :stream | >>> (STONWriter on: (stream)) prettyPrint: true; writeList: ex ]. >>> >>> I had thought maybe NeoJSON might help and put: >>> >>> String streamContents: [ :stream | >>> (NeoJSONWriter on: (stream)) prettyPrint: true; >>> "mapInstVarsFor: Association;" >>> nextPut: ex ]. >>> >>> But I get the error about missing an association mapping. If I uncomment that bit - I get things like: { "value" : âpharo" }, >>> >>> So is there a way I can write a simple mapper for Association that will write out the key in a string and the value in a string? >>> >>> Iâm quite suprised we canât easily write out fragments of Json in our code in a light weight way? Or do I need to make a proper Config object and then teach it how to map properly such that rather than fiddling with our { x->y } dictionary sugar I do something like: >>> >>> Config new at: âidâ is: 123; at: ânameâ is: âTimâ; at: âexercisesâ is: #(1 2 3). >>> >>> And I guess at:is: can do the Association asDictionary thing? >>> >>> But I thought Neo might give me something like that, as it must be terribly common? >>> >>> Tim >>> >>>> On 28 Feb 2019, at 13:16, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >>>> >>>> STONJSON toString: { #id->1. #name->'tim' } asDictionary. >>>> >>>> JSON cannot deal with Associations by themselves. >>>> >>>>> On 28 Feb 2019, at 14:05, Tim Mackinnon <tim(a)testit.works> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I am stumped about how to write out some simple json (for a config file). I didn't think I need Neo, and STONJSON would be fine but it seems like creating items like: >>>>> >>>>> { 'id'-> self id. 'name' -> self name } >>>>> >>>>> gives an error about the association. I think you have to do: { ('id'-> self id) asDictionary. ('name' -> self name) asDictionary } everywhereâ¦. >>>>> >>>>> But when I switch over to NeoJsonWriter it also complains about Assocations too. I just want a simple output like: >>>>> { "id" : 12, "name" : "timâ } >>>>> >>>>> I thought it was simple to do this? Am I missing something obvious. >>>>> >>>>> Tim >>>> >>> >> >

March 1, 2019

Re: [Pharo-users] Interval form: x to: y when x > y - or how to count down...

by K K Subbu

On 28/02/19 6:33 PM, Tim Mackinnon wrote: > > So I would expect â1 to: 0â to see: > 1 -> 1 > 2 -> 0. It is difficult for code to guess the intent of the coder. Did the coder intend an decreasing sequence or a stopping condition (i == end or i > end?). Perhaps, we could use an explicit selector: 5 downto: 1 to disambiguate between the two cases. Regards .. Subbu

March 1, 2019

Re: [Pharo-users] How to write out simple Json?

by Jimmie Houchin

I don't know if you really need OrderedDictionary or not. But I am a big fan of and use all the time simple Arrays or OrderedCollection of pairs. It is neat, clean and readable. ex := Dictionary newFromPairs: { Â Â Â 'track'. 'pharo. Â Â Â 'language'. 'smalltalk'. Â Â Â 'exercises'. Dictionary newFromPairs: { Â Â Â Â Â Â 'slug'. 'hello'. Â Â Â Â Â Â 'id'. 55. Â Â Â Â Â Â 'topics'. #('a' 'b' 'c')} In my app each individual level creates its own Dictionaries. I don't if such would be applicable for you. I have methods at each level which start like below. I don't know ahead of time whether or not I am receiving a Dictionary or an Array. I use this extensively for configuration that is readable and compact. I prefer this to the above when possible. And prefer pairs to associations. To my eyes it is cleaner. config := { Â Â Â 'track'. 'pharo. Â Â Â 'language'. 'smalltalk'. Â Â Â 'exercises'. { Â Â Â Â Â Â 'slug'. 'hello'. Â Â Â Â Â Â 'id'. 55. Â Â Â Â Â Â 'topics'. #('a' 'b' 'c')} myMethod: config Â Â Â confd := config isDictionary Â Â Â Â Â Â ifTrue: [ config ] Â Â Â Â Â Â ifFalse: [ Dictionary newFromPairs: config ]. Â Â Â Â Â Â ... I use this also for JSON as I am using a REST API which receives JSON objects but it is also easy to pass in the necessary key:value pairs to the ZnClient. I don't know if this is of any value. But it is something I do extensively and pervasively in my app. I spent a lot of time thinking and iterating on how to handle large, complex, and nested configurations and enable them to be as clean, neat and concise as possible without limiting them in any foreseeable manner. Jimmie On 2/28/19 7:45 AM, Tim Mackinnon wrote: > Just to add more flavour to this - it seems quite wordy that we have to do this (or equivalent) to write some config. > > ex := OrderedDictionary new > at: 'track' put: 'pharo'; > at: 'language' put: 'smalltalk'; > at: 'exercises' put: ( > OrderedDictionary new > at: 'slug' put: 'hello'; > at: 'id' put: 55; > at: 'topics' put: #('a' 'b' 'c'); > yourself ); > yourself. > > String streamContents: [ :stream | > (NeoJSONWriter on: (stream)) prettyPrint: true; > mapInstVarsFor: Association; > nextPut: ex ]. > > So Iâm still wondering the NeoJSONObjectMapping can do something easy for Association other than simply mapInstVars? > > >> On 28 Feb 2019, at 13:36, Tim Mackinnon <tim(a)testit.works> wrote: >> >> Hi Sven - is there no convenience shortcut we can use in our code to make this less wordy when we are specifying it? >> >> E.g. the following is very convenient to write - but doesnât work (as you have $â and not $â ) >> >> ex := { 'track'-> 'pharo'. >> 'language' -> 'smalltalk'. >> 'exercises' -> >> {'slug' -> 'hello'. >> 'id' -> 55. >> 'topics' -> #('a' 'b' 'c') } >> }. >> >> String streamContents: [ :stream | >> (STONWriter on: (stream)) prettyPrint: true; writeList: ex ]. >> >> I had thought maybe NeoJSON might help and put: >> >> String streamContents: [ :stream | >> (NeoJSONWriter on: (stream)) prettyPrint: true; >> "mapInstVarsFor: Association;" >> nextPut: ex ]. >> >> But I get the error about missing an association mapping. If I uncomment that bit - I get things like: { "value" : âpharo" }, >> >> So is there a way I can write a simple mapper for Association that will write out the key in a string and the value in a string? >> >> Iâm quite suprised we canât easily write out fragments of Json in our code in a light weight way? Or do I need to make a proper Config object and then teach it how to map properly such that rather than fiddling with our { x->y } dictionary sugar I do something like: >> >> Config new at: âidâ is: 123; at: ânameâ is: âTimâ; at: âexercisesâ is: #(1 2 3). >> >> And I guess at:is: can do the Association asDictionary thing? >> >> But I thought Neo might give me something like that, as it must be terribly common? >> >> Tim >> >>> On 28 Feb 2019, at 13:16, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >>> >>> STONJSON toString: { #id->1. #name->'tim' } asDictionary. >>> >>> JSON cannot deal with Associations by themselves. >>> >>>> On 28 Feb 2019, at 14:05, Tim Mackinnon <tim(a)testit.works> wrote: >>>> >>>> I am stumped about how to write out some simple json (for a config file). I didn't think I need Neo, and STONJSON would be fine but it seems like creating items like: >>>> >>>> { 'id'-> self id. 'name' -> self name } >>>> >>>> gives an error about the association. I think you have to do: { ('id'-> self id) asDictionary. ('name' -> self name) asDictionary } everywhereâ¦. >>>> >>>> But when I switch over to NeoJsonWriter it also complains about Assocations too. I just want a simple output like: >>>> { "id" : 12, "name" : "timâ } >>>> >>>> I thought it was simple to do this? Am I missing something obvious. >>>> >>>> Tim >>> >> >

March 1, 2019