proposal: encoding/json: add a generic Decode function

[joerdav]

I believe with generics now in place a new more convenient Decode function could be added to the encoding/json package, amongst other encoding/* packages.

Proposed:

func handler(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
	request, err := json.NewDecoder(r.Body).DecodeInto[MyStruct]()
	if err != nil {
		...
	}
	...
}

Existing:

func handler(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
	var request MyStruct
	err := json.NewDecoder(r.Body).Decode(&request)
	if err != nil {
		...
	}
	...
}

The benefit of this API is not only is it more concise, but it removes the possibility of a json: Unmarshal(nil) error.

[ianlancetaylor]

CC @dsnet @mvdan

[a-h]

I think I remember reading somewhere that the idea of APIs that take a pointer is that you can reuse the MyStruct multiple times to avoid allocations. However, I can't think of a time I ever used the var request MyStruct more than once.

At the moment, you can't have generics on a method, and the design above has DecodeInto being a method on the json.Decoder type which has type parameters.

So I think you'd have to have the type on the json.Decoder type as per this example: https://go.dev/play/p/ts7x6mZP74j

This has the benefit of adding strong typing to the existing json.Decoder package's signature in a backwards compatible way.

package main

import (
	"encoding/json"
	"fmt"
	"io"
	"log"
	"strings"
)

type Data struct {
	Name string `json:"name"`
	Age  int    `json:"age"`
}

func main() {
	r := strings.NewReader(`{ "name": "test", "age": 31 }`)

	result, err := NewDecoder[Data](r).Result()
	if err != nil {
		log.Fatalf("failed to decode: %v", err)
	}
	fmt.Printf("name: %v\n", result.Name)
}

func NewDecoder[T any](r io.Reader) *Decoder[T] {
	return &Decoder[T]{r: r}
}

type Decoder[T any] struct {
	r io.Reader
}

func (d *Decoder[T]) Decode(v *T) error {
	return json.NewDecoder(d.r).Decode(&v)
}

func (d *Decoder[T]) Result() (v T, err error) {
	err = d.Decode(&v)
	return
}

[joerdav]

Yes that's a good point, you would need a new Decoder type, unless we got #49085 first.

[a-h]

Actually, my idea doesn't work for the existing API - https://go.dev/play/p/iRU0oLt4wPK

This is because there's no way to have a constraint that enforces that a generic parameter is a struct as per the conversation here https://groups.google.com/g/golang-nuts/c/UxVAj75L-rg/m/raCOyQRjAAAJ

[earthboundkid]

https://go.dev/blog/when-generics

If some operation has to support even types that don’t have methods (so that interface types don’t help), and if the operation is different for each type (so that type parameters aren’t appropriate), use reflection.
An example of this is the encoding/json package. We don’t want to require that every type that we encode have a MarshalJSON method, so we can’t use interface types. But encoding an interface type is nothing like encoding a struct type, so we shouldn’t use type parameters. Instead, the package uses reflection. The code is not simple, but it works.

[dsnet]

I'm not sure a generic variant provides sufficient benefit.

Consider these two patterns:

var v T
if err := dec.Decode(&v); err != nil {
    ...
}

versus:

v, err := dec.Decode[T]()
if err != nil {
    ...
}

Both are 4 lines.

[leaxoy]

I'm not sure a generic variant provides sufficient benefit.

Consider these two patterns:

var v T
if err := dec.Decode(&v); err != nil {
    ...
}

versus:

v, err := dec.Decode[T]()
if err != nil {
    ...
}

Both are 4 lines.

I thinks this is error handling limitation, not generics.

[seankhliao]

I think we should decline this for the same reason we should decline #57975
This is an unnecessary use of generics.

[seankhliao]

Closing as even with json/v2, there isn't really appetite for doing this.