Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add json.tool option to avoid alphabetic sort of fields #65849

Closed
PavelKazlou mannequin opened this issue Jun 3, 2014 · 18 comments
Closed

add json.tool option to avoid alphabetic sort of fields #65849

PavelKazlou mannequin opened this issue Jun 3, 2014 · 18 comments
Assignees
Labels
stdlib Python modules in the Lib dir type-feature A feature request or enhancement

Comments

@PavelKazlou
Copy link
Mannequin

PavelKazlou mannequin commented Jun 3, 2014

BPO 21650
Nosy @rhettinger, @pitrou, @ezio-melotti, @bitdancer, @berkerpeksag, @vadmium, @serhiy-storchaka
Files
  • issue21650.diff
  • issue21650_v2.diff
  • issue21650_v3.diff
  • issue21650_v4.diff
  • Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.

    Show more details

    GitHub fields:

    assignee = 'https://github.com/berkerpeksag'
    closed_at = <Date 2014-11-10.07:58:05.540>
    created_at = <Date 2014-06-03.10:11:31.342>
    labels = ['type-feature', 'library']
    title = 'add json.tool option to avoid alphabetic sort of fields'
    updated_at = <Date 2014-11-10.07:58:05.539>
    user = 'https://bugs.python.org/PavelKazlou'

    bugs.python.org fields:

    activity = <Date 2014-11-10.07:58:05.539>
    actor = 'berker.peksag'
    assignee = 'berker.peksag'
    closed = True
    closed_date = <Date 2014-11-10.07:58:05.540>
    closer = 'berker.peksag'
    components = ['Library (Lib)']
    creation = <Date 2014-06-03.10:11:31.342>
    creator = 'Pavel.Kazlou'
    dependencies = []
    files = ['35468', '35631', '37110', '37119']
    hgrepos = []
    issue_num = 21650
    keywords = ['patch']
    message_count = 18.0
    messages = ['219675', '219677', '219678', '219804', '219834', '219835', '219889', '219891', '219893', '220556', '230431', '230433', '230434', '230511', '230563', '230669', '230939', '230940']
    nosy_count = 9.0
    nosy_names = ['rhettinger', 'pitrou', 'ezio.melotti', 'r.david.murray', 'python-dev', 'berker.peksag', 'martin.panter', 'serhiy.storchaka', 'Pavel.Kazlou']
    pr_nums = []
    priority = 'normal'
    resolution = 'fixed'
    stage = 'resolved'
    status = 'closed'
    superseder = None
    type = 'enhancement'
    url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue21650'
    versions = ['Python 3.5']

    @PavelKazlou
    Copy link
    Mannequin Author

    PavelKazlou mannequin commented Jun 3, 2014

    Currently when you use json.tool, fields are reordered alphabetically.
    In source code the value of sort_keys is hardcoded to be true.
    It should be easy to expose this option as command line parameter.

    @PavelKazlou PavelKazlou mannequin added stdlib Python modules in the Lib dir type-feature A feature request or enhancement labels Jun 3, 2014
    @PavelKazlou
    Copy link
    Mannequin Author

    PavelKazlou mannequin commented Jun 3, 2014

    This is the line in module I'm talking about:
    json.dump(obj, outfile, sort_keys=True, indent=4)

    @berkerpeksag
    Copy link
    Member

    berkerpeksag commented Jun 3, 2014

    Here's a patch with a test case.

    @pitrou
    Copy link
    Member

    pitrou commented Jun 5, 2014

    I don't really understand the point of this. The "unsorted" output order will be unpredictable for the user (it isn't necessarily the same as the order of fields in the input data).

    @bitdancer
    Copy link
    Member

    bitdancer commented Jun 5, 2014

    It should be possible to also change the tool to use OrderDicts, though.

    @bitdancer
    Copy link
    Member

    bitdancer commented Jun 5, 2014

    Or does the data get decoded to a dict *before* it gets passed to the object_hook? Probably, in which case nevermind...

    @PavelKazlou
    Copy link
    Mannequin Author

    PavelKazlou mannequin commented Jun 6, 2014

    The idea is to keep the same order as in input.

    @bitdancer
    Copy link
    Member

    bitdancer commented Jun 6, 2014

    Yes but the input is turned into a dict, and dicts do not preserve order. Further, what is passed to the object_hook is already a dict, so the order is already lost before object_hook is called.

    Since the parser (or at least the Python version of the parser) first turns the input into a list of pairs, and a Python OrderedDict can be instantiated from a list of pairs, it would theoretically be possible to extend the object_hook API to allow an OrderedDict to be used on decode. Exactly how to do that so as to retain backward compatibility is a bit of a question.

    So, it is *possible* to achieve your aim, but it isn't as simple as allowing sort= to be set False.

    IMO being able to preserve the order of the input when desired (ie: use an OrderedDict object_hook) would be a nice feature to have.

    @bitdancer
    Copy link
    Member

    bitdancer commented Jun 6, 2014

    Wait, I read the code wrong.

    You can define object_pairs_hook, and use that to return an OrderedDict. So it should be possible to do this without changing the json module itself. This is actually documented as a place to use OrderedDict. Guess I should have read the docs instead of the code :)

    @berkerpeksag
    Copy link
    Member

    berkerpeksag commented Jun 14, 2014

    Updated patch attached based on feedback from David. Thanks!

    @rhettinger
    Copy link
    Contributor

    rhettinger commented Nov 1, 2014

    To me, "--unsorted" implies arbitrary ordering such as the order generated by regular dictionaries. I think the option should be "--order-preserving" or some such. The option name needs to make it clear that the output is in the same order an the input.

    As side from the option name, I'm +1 on the patch. It is very annoying to look at scrambled JSON when the original presentation order made more logical sense.

    @serhiy-storchaka
    Copy link
    Member

    serhiy-storchaka commented Nov 1, 2014

    May be make sorting keys not default?

    @rhettinger
    Copy link
    Contributor

    rhettinger commented Nov 1, 2014

    Maybe make sorting keys not default?

    If you mean preserve order by default, then yes that would be a nice default.

    @berkerpeksag
    Copy link
    Member

    berkerpeksag commented Nov 2, 2014

    Thanks for the suggestions.

    If you mean preserve order by default, then yes that would be a nice default.

    issue21650_v3.diff implements this idea.

    @serhiy-storchaka
    Copy link
    Member

    serhiy-storchaka commented Nov 3, 2014

    LGTM.

    @rhettinger
    Copy link
    Contributor

    rhettinger commented Nov 5, 2014

    The patch looks good. One nit, the phrase "sorted by their key" has an odd ring to it and is mildly confusing, though technically correct. Perhaps, "sorted alphabetically by key" would be better for most folks.

    @python-dev
    Copy link
    Mannequin

    python-dev mannequin commented Nov 10, 2014

    New changeset 58a871227e5b by Berker Peksag in branch 'default':
    Issue bpo-21650: Add an --sort-keys option to json.tool CLI.
    https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/58a871227e5b

    @berkerpeksag
    Copy link
    Member

    berkerpeksag commented Nov 10, 2014

    Thanks for the reviews.

    @ezio-melotti ezio-melotti transferred this issue from another repository Apr 10, 2022
    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
    Labels
    stdlib Python modules in the Lib dir type-feature A feature request or enhancement
    Projects
    None yet
    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    5 participants