feat: added option 'useJsonWireFormat' (#576)

* New option 'useJsonWireFormat'. Fixes issue #571

* Added test.

* Formatting.

README.markdown

@@ -406,6 +406,11 @@ Generated code will be placed in the Gradle build directory.
 
   Note that, as indicated, this means Object.keys will not include set-by-default fields, so if you have code that iterates over messages keys in a generic fashion, it will have to also iterate over keys inherited from the prototype.
 
+- With `--ts_proto_opt=useJsonWireFormat=true`, the generated code will reflect the JSON representation of Protobuf messages.
+
+  Requires `onlyTypes=true`. Implies `useDate=string` and `stringEnums=true`. This option is to generate types that can be directly used with marshalling/unmarshalling Protobuf messages serialized as JSON.  
+  You may also want to set `useOptionals=all`, as gRPC gateways are not required to send default value for scalar values.
+
 ### Only Types
 
 If you're looking for `ts-proto` to generate only types for your Protobuf types then passing all three of `outputEncodeMethods`, `outputJsonMethods`, and `outputClientImpl` as `false` is probably what you want, i.e.:

integration/use-json-wire-format/google/protobuf/duration.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,80 @@
+/* eslint-disable */
+export const protobufPackage = 'google.protobuf';
+
+/**
+ * A Duration represents a signed, fixed-length span of time represented
+ * as a count of seconds and fractions of seconds at nanosecond
+ * resolution. It is independent of any calendar and concepts like "day"
+ * or "month". It is related to Timestamp in that the difference between
+ * two Timestamp values is a Duration and it can be added or subtracted
+ * from a Timestamp. Range is approximately +-10,000 years.
+ *
+ * # Examples
+ *
+ * Example 1: Compute Duration from two Timestamps in pseudo code.
+ *
+ *     Timestamp start = ...;
+ *     Timestamp end = ...;
+ *     Duration duration = ...;
+ *
+ *     duration.seconds = end.seconds - start.seconds;
+ *     duration.nanos = end.nanos - start.nanos;
+ *
+ *     if (duration.seconds < 0 && duration.nanos > 0) {
+ *       duration.seconds += 1;
+ *       duration.nanos -= 1000000000;
+ *     } else if (duration.seconds > 0 && duration.nanos < 0) {
+ *       duration.seconds -= 1;
+ *       duration.nanos += 1000000000;
+ *     }
+ *
+ * Example 2: Compute Timestamp from Timestamp + Duration in pseudo code.
+ *
+ *     Timestamp start = ...;
+ *     Duration duration = ...;
+ *     Timestamp end = ...;
+ *
+ *     end.seconds = start.seconds + duration.seconds;
+ *     end.nanos = start.nanos + duration.nanos;
+ *
+ *     if (end.nanos < 0) {
+ *       end.seconds -= 1;
+ *       end.nanos += 1000000000;
+ *     } else if (end.nanos >= 1000000000) {
+ *       end.seconds += 1;
+ *       end.nanos -= 1000000000;
+ *     }
+ *
+ * Example 3: Compute Duration from datetime.timedelta in Python.
+ *
+ *     td = datetime.timedelta(days=3, minutes=10)
+ *     duration = Duration()
+ *     duration.FromTimedelta(td)
+ *
+ * # JSON Mapping
+ *
+ * In JSON format, the Duration type is encoded as a string rather than an
+ * object, where the string ends in the suffix "s" (indicating seconds) and
+ * is preceded by the number of seconds, with nanoseconds expressed as
+ * fractional seconds. For example, 3 seconds with 0 nanoseconds should be
+ * encoded in JSON format as "3s", while 3 seconds and 1 nanosecond should
+ * be expressed in JSON format as "3.000000001s", and 3 seconds and 1
+ * microsecond should be expressed in JSON format as "3.000001s".
+ */
+export interface Duration {
+  /**
+   * Signed seconds of the span of time. Must be from -315,576,000,000
+   * to +315,576,000,000 inclusive. Note: these bounds are computed from:
+   * 60 sec/min * 60 min/hr * 24 hr/day * 365.25 days/year * 10000 years
+   */
+  seconds?: number;
+  /**
+   * Signed fractions of a second at nanosecond resolution of the span
+   * of time. Durations less than one second are represented with a 0
+   * `seconds` field and a positive or negative `nanos` field. For durations
+   * of one second or more, a non-zero value for the `nanos` field must be
+   * of the same sign as the `seconds` field. Must be from -999,999,999
+   * to +999,999,999 inclusive.
+   */
+  nanos?: number;
+}

integration/use-json-wire-format/google/protobuf/field_mask.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,208 @@
+/* eslint-disable */
+export const protobufPackage = 'google.protobuf';
+
+/**
+ * `FieldMask` represents a set of symbolic field paths, for example:
+ *
+ *     paths: "f.a"
+ *     paths: "f.b.d"
+ *
+ * Here `f` represents a field in some root message, `a` and `b`
+ * fields in the message found in `f`, and `d` a field found in the
+ * message in `f.b`.
+ *
+ * Field masks are used to specify a subset of fields that should be
+ * returned by a get operation or modified by an update operation.
+ * Field masks also have a custom JSON encoding (see below).
+ *
+ * # Field Masks in Projections
+ *
+ * When used in the context of a projection, a response message or
+ * sub-message is filtered by the API to only contain those fields as
+ * specified in the mask. For example, if the mask in the previous
+ * example is applied to a response message as follows:
+ *
+ *     f {
+ *       a : 22
+ *       b {
+ *         d : 1
+ *         x : 2
+ *       }
+ *       y : 13
+ *     }
+ *     z: 8
+ *
+ * The result will not contain specific values for fields x,y and z
+ * (their value will be set to the default, and omitted in proto text
+ * output):
+ *
+ *
+ *     f {
+ *       a : 22
+ *       b {
+ *         d : 1
+ *       }
+ *     }
+ *
+ * A repeated field is not allowed except at the last position of a
+ * paths string.
+ *
+ * If a FieldMask object is not present in a get operation, the
+ * operation applies to all fields (as if a FieldMask of all fields
+ * had been specified).
+ *
+ * Note that a field mask does not necessarily apply to the
+ * top-level response message. In case of a REST get operation, the
+ * field mask applies directly to the response, but in case of a REST
+ * list operation, the mask instead applies to each individual message
+ * in the returned resource list. In case of a REST custom method,
+ * other definitions may be used. Where the mask applies will be
+ * clearly documented together with its declaration in the API.  In
+ * any case, the effect on the returned resource/resources is required
+ * behavior for APIs.
+ *
+ * # Field Masks in Update Operations
+ *
+ * A field mask in update operations specifies which fields of the
+ * targeted resource are going to be updated. The API is required
+ * to only change the values of the fields as specified in the mask
+ * and leave the others untouched. If a resource is passed in to
+ * describe the updated values, the API ignores the values of all
+ * fields not covered by the mask.
+ *
+ * If a repeated field is specified for an update operation, new values will
+ * be appended to the existing repeated field in the target resource. Note that
+ * a repeated field is only allowed in the last position of a `paths` string.
+ *
+ * If a sub-message is specified in the last position of the field mask for an
+ * update operation, then new value will be merged into the existing sub-message
+ * in the target resource.
+ *
+ * For example, given the target message:
+ *
+ *     f {
+ *       b {
+ *         d: 1
+ *         x: 2
+ *       }
+ *       c: [1]
+ *     }
+ *
+ * And an update message:
+ *
+ *     f {
+ *       b {
+ *         d: 10
+ *       }
+ *       c: [2]
+ *     }
+ *
+ * then if the field mask is:
+ *
+ *  paths: ["f.b", "f.c"]
+ *
+ * then the result will be:
+ *
+ *     f {
+ *       b {
+ *         d: 10
+ *         x: 2
+ *       }
+ *       c: [1, 2]
+ *     }
+ *
+ * An implementation may provide options to override this default behavior for
+ * repeated and message fields.
+ *
+ * In order to reset a field's value to the default, the field must
+ * be in the mask and set to the default value in the provided resource.
+ * Hence, in order to reset all fields of a resource, provide a default
+ * instance of the resource and set all fields in the mask, or do
+ * not provide a mask as described below.
+ *
+ * If a field mask is not present on update, the operation applies to
+ * all fields (as if a field mask of all fields has been specified).
+ * Note that in the presence of schema evolution, this may mean that
+ * fields the client does not know and has therefore not filled into
+ * the request will be reset to their default. If this is unwanted
+ * behavior, a specific service may require a client to always specify
+ * a field mask, producing an error if not.
+ *
+ * As with get operations, the location of the resource which
+ * describes the updated values in the request message depends on the
+ * operation kind. In any case, the effect of the field mask is
+ * required to be honored by the API.
+ *
+ * ## Considerations for HTTP REST
+ *
+ * The HTTP kind of an update operation which uses a field mask must
+ * be set to PATCH instead of PUT in order to satisfy HTTP semantics
+ * (PUT must only be used for full updates).
+ *
+ * # JSON Encoding of Field Masks
+ *
+ * In JSON, a field mask is encoded as a single string where paths are
+ * separated by a comma. Fields name in each path are converted
+ * to/from lower-camel naming conventions.
+ *
+ * As an example, consider the following message declarations:
+ *
+ *     message Profile {
+ *       User user = 1;
+ *       Photo photo = 2;
+ *     }
+ *     message User {
+ *       string display_name = 1;
+ *       string address = 2;
+ *     }
+ *
+ * In proto a field mask for `Profile` may look as such:
+ *
+ *     mask {
+ *       paths: "user.display_name"
+ *       paths: "photo"
+ *     }
+ *
+ * In JSON, the same mask is represented as below:
+ *
+ *     {
+ *       mask: "user.displayName,photo"
+ *     }
+ *
+ * # Field Masks and Oneof Fields
+ *
+ * Field masks treat fields in oneofs just as regular fields. Consider the
+ * following message:
+ *
+ *     message SampleMessage {
+ *       oneof test_oneof {
+ *         string name = 4;
+ *         SubMessage sub_message = 9;
+ *       }
+ *     }
+ *
+ * The field mask can be:
+ *
+ *     mask {
+ *       paths: "name"
+ *     }
+ *
+ * Or:
+ *
+ *     mask {
+ *       paths: "sub_message"
+ *     }
+ *
+ * Note that oneof type names ("test_oneof" in this case) cannot be used in
+ * paths.
+ *
+ * ## Field Mask Verification
+ *
+ * The implementation of any API method which has a FieldMask type field in the
+ * request should verify the included field paths, and return an
+ * `INVALID_ARGUMENT` error if any path is unmappable.
+ */
+export interface FieldMask {
+  /** The set of field mask paths. */
+  paths?: string[];
+}