Adding has_<type>_field utility to json value #551
Merged
+138
−1
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Adding unit tests for has_<type>_field utilities
|
These seem quite reasonable to me as is, though they leave a bit of performance on the table (in the pattern you have, it makes 3 separate lookups). I think to fix this would really require |
|
Agreed, once CppRestSDK uses c++17 then std::optional is the way to go! Actually, I can make this more efficient so that it does one less lookup. I'll follow up with another PR. Thanks for the feedback. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In our code base we have a repeating pattern of accessing json objects while interpreting server responses.
It looks something like as follows:
if(val.has_field(U("key")) && val.at(U("key")).is_string()) { something = val.at(U("key")).as_string() }Both of these checks are required or a json exception will be thrown at runtime. This is quite verbose and problematic as sometimes developers on our team forget to check both of these. I'm proposing adding a new check for each type supported in json that combines these two checks into one.
With this change the above code becomes:
if(val.has_string_field(U("key"))) { something = val.at(U("key")).as_string() }