Passing a JSON object to worklight java adapter - ibm-mobilefirst

I would like to pass a complete JSON object to a java adapter in worklight. This adapter will call multiple other remote resources to fulfill the request. I would like to pass the json structure instead of listing out all of the parameters for a number of reasons. Invoking the worklight procedure works well. I pass the following as the parameter:
{ "parm1": 1, "parm2" : "hello" }
Which the tool is fine with. When it calls my java code, I see a object type of JSObjectConverter$1 being passed. In java debug, I can see the values in the object, but I do not see any documentation on how to do this. If memory serves me, the $1 says that it is an anonymous inner class that is being passed. Is there a better way to pass a json object/structure in adapters?

Lets assume you have this in adapter code
function test(){
var jsonObject = { "param1": 1, "param2" : "hello" };
var param2value = com.mycode.MyClass.parseJsonObject(jsonObject);
return {
result: param2value
};
}
Doesn't really matter where you're getting jsonObject from, it may come as a param from client. Worklight uses Rhino JS engine, therefore com.mycode.MyClass.parseJsonObject() function will get jsonObject as a org.mozilla.javascript.NativeObject. You can easily get obj properties like this
package com.mycode;
import org.mozilla.javascript.NativeObject;
public class MyClass {
public static String parseJsonObject(NativeObject obj){
String param2 = (String) NativeObject.getProperty(obj, "param2");
return param2;
}
}

To better explain what I'm doing here, I wanted to be able to pass a javascript object into an adapter and have it return an updated javascript object. Looks like there are two ways. The first it what I answered above a few days ago with serializing and unserializing the javascript object. The other is using the ScriptableObject class. What I wanted in the end was to use the adapter framework as described to pass in the javascript object. In doing so, this is what the Adapter JS-impl code looks like:
function add2(a) {
return {
result: com.ibm.us.roberso.Calculator.add2(a)
};
The javascript code in the client application calling the above adapter. Note that I have a function to test passing the javascript object as a parameter to the adapter framework. See the invocationData.parameters below:
function runAdapterCode2() {
// x+y=z
var jsonObject = { "x": 1, "y" : 2, "z" : "?" };
var invocationData = {
adapter : "CalculatorAdapter",
procedure : 'add2',
parameters : [jsonObject]
};
var options = {
onSuccess : success2,
onFailure : failure,
invocationContext : { 'action' : 'add2 test' }
};
WL.Client.invokeProcedure(invocationData, options);
}
In runAdapterCode2(), the javascript object is passed as you would pass any parameter into the adapter. When worklight tries to execute the java method it will look for a method signature of either taking an Object or ScriptableObject (not a NativeObject). I used the java reflection api to verify the class and hierarchy being passed in. Using the static methods on ScriptableObject you can query and modify the value in the object. At the end of the method, you can have it return a Scriptable object. Doing this will give you a javascript object back in the invocationResults.result field. Below is the java code supporting this. Please note that a good chunk of the code is there as part of the investigation on what object type is really being passed. At the bottom of the method are the few lines really needed to work with the javascript object.
#SuppressWarnings({ "unused", "rawtypes" })
public static ScriptableObject add2(ScriptableObject obj) {
// code to determine object class being passed in and its heirarchy
String result = "";
Class objClass = obj.getClass();
result = "objClass = " + objClass.getName() + "\r\n";
result += "implements=";
Class[] interfaces = objClass.getInterfaces();
for (Class classInterface : interfaces) {
result += " " + classInterface.getName() ;
}
result += "\r\nsuperclasses=";
Class superClass = objClass.getSuperclass();
while(superClass != null) {
result += " " + superClass.getName();
superClass = superClass.getSuperclass();
}
// actual code working with the javascript object
String a = (String) ScriptableObject.getProperty((ScriptableObject)obj, "z");
ScriptableObject.putProperty((ScriptableObject)obj, "z", new Long(3));
return obj;
}
Note that for javascript object, a numeric value is a Long and not int. Strings are still Strings.
Summary
There are two ways to pass in a javascript object that I've found so far.
Convert to a string in javascript, pass string to java, and have it reconstitute into a JSONObject.
Pass the javascript object and use the ScriptableObject classes to manipulate on the java side.

Related

worklight 6.2 native api adapter invocation

In JavaScript my Worklight Client can pass arbitrary objects to an adapter:
var payload = { able: 3488, baker: "wibble"};
var invocationData = {
adapter : 'xxx',
procedure : 'xxx',
parameters : [payload],
compressResponse : false
};
var options = {
onSuccess: onCallSuccess,
onFailure: onCallFailure
};
WL.Client.invokeProcedure(invocationData, options);
and the adapter can access the object
function xxx(p1) {
return {'answer': p1.able};
}
In the native APIs it seems that we are limited to primitive types:
public void setParameters(java.lang.Object[] parameters)
This method
sets the request parameters. The order of the object in the array will
be the order sending them to the adapter
Parameters: Object -
parameters An array of objects of primitive types ( String, Integer,
Float, Boolean, Double). The order of the objects in the array is the
order in which they are sent to the adapter.
Hence if my adapters are to be used by both JavaScript and Native clients they will need to accept any complex objects as JSON Strings. Unless there is an alternative I'm missing?
I don't see a better alternative than simply stringifying the object as you have suggested. Are you using objects other than JSON in your native side? If so what is the structure of the object?

Converting an object into Dynamic with JSON.Net

What I'm wanting to do, is take an object construct (For example, an Entity Framework object), then convert it to a dynamic object (Thinking JSON.Net JObject may be the best fit), and extending said object with additional properties for sending to the client, or a View template.
dynamic model = JS.ToJObject(myConcreteInstance);
model.AdditionalValue = "I need this stuff on the client... ";
Here's what I have, which works, but would rather not have the try/catch.
//JS.ToJObject
public static JObject ToJObject(object input)
{
try {
//anonymous types throw an exception here
// Could not determine JSON object type for type f__AnonymousType ...
return new JObject(input);
} catch(Exception) {
//fallback to serialize/deserialize, which seems wasteful
var txt = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(
input
,new IsoDateTimeConverter()
,new DataTableConverter()
,new DataSetConverter()
);
return JObject.Parse(txt);
}
}

How to mock the 'new' operator

I'm testing some groovy code that uses a java library and I want to mock out the library calls because they use the network. So the code under test looks something like:
def verifyInformation(String information) {
def request = new OusideLibraryRequest().compose(information)
new OutsideLibraryClient().verify(request)
}
I tried using MockFor and StubFor but I get errors such as:
No signature of method: com.myproject.OutsideLibraryTests.MockFor() is applicable for argument types: (java.lang.Class) values: [class com.otherCompany.OusideLibraryRequest]
I'm using Grails 2.0.3.
I've just found that we can always overwrite a constructor via MetaClass, as Grails 2 will be reset MetaClass modification at the end of each test.
This trick is better than Groovy's MockFor. AFAIK, Groovy's MockFor does not allow us to mock JDK's classes, java.io.File, for example. However in the below example, you cannot use File file = new File("aaa") as the real object type is a Map, not a File. The example is a Spock specification.
def "test mock"() {
setup:
def fileControl = mockFor(File)
File.metaClass.constructor = { String name -> [name: name] }
def file = new File("aaaa")
expect:
file.name == "aaaa"
}
The second, optional parameter to MockFor's constructor is interceptConstruction. If you set this to true, you can mock the constructor. Example:
import groovy.mock.interceptor.MockFor
class SomeClass {
def prop
SomeClass() {
prop = "real"
}
}
def mock = new MockFor(SomeClass, true)
mock.demand.with {
SomeClass() { new Expando([prop: "fake"]) }
}
mock.use {
def mockedSomeClass = new SomeClass()
assert mockedSomeClass.prop == "fake"
}
Note, however, you can only mock out groovy objects like this. If you're stuck with a Java library, you can pull the construction of the Java object into a factory method and mock that.

HTTPService not properly JSON-encoding nested objects on send()

i am creating an object like this:
var myObj:Object = new Object();
myObj["someProperty"] = {
anotherProperty: "someValue",
whateverProperty: "anotherValue"
}
now i want to send it to a web server (rails):
var service:HTTPService = new HTTPService();
service.url = "http://server.com/some/path/entry.json";
service.method = URLRequestMethod.POST;
service.send( myObj );
the problem is that the server receives the json like this:
{"someProperty"=>"[object Object]"}
is this a problem with HTTPService? should i use the good old loader/urlrequest and serialize myself? by the way, serializing and then passing the string doesn't work, webserver receives empty request as GET.
but i kinda want to use the httpservice class though...
You can use a SerializationFilter with your HTTPService to correctly serialize the data you pass as an object to HTTPService.send().
The way in which this works is to create a custom SerializationFilter to perform the specific action required. In your case, you want to convert the outgoing body Object to a JSON format String. To do this you should override the serializeBody method:
package
{
import mx.rpc.http.AbstractOperation;
import mx.rpc.http.SerializationFilter;
import com.adobe.serialization.json.JSON;
public class JSONSerializationFilter extends SerializationFilter
{
override public function serializeBody(operation:AbstractOperation, obj:Object):Object
{
return JSON.encode(obj);
}
}
}
You can assign an instance of this filter to your HTTPService before calling send():
var service:HTTPService = new HTTPService();
service.url = "http://server.com/some/path/entry.json";
service.method = URLRequestMethod.POST;
//add the serialization filter
service.serializationFilter = new JSONSerializationFilter();
service.send( myObj );
Once assigned, this filter will be invoked for all the operations this HTTPService instance performs. You can also add more override methods to your custom filter to handle the incoming response.
I highly recommend using Mike Chamber's JSON serialization library for encoding / decoding (serializing) data in JSON.
Basically, you need to convert your object into a JSON representation. The JSONEncoder class is useful for this.
There's a useful (old but still very relevant for using HTTPService + JSON) tutorial that goes through it, but essentially you should call JSON.encode() on what your "someProperty" value is.
i.e.:
var dataString:String = JSON.encode(dataValue);
dataString = escape(dataString);
myObj["someProperty"] = dataString;

Can I stop my WCF generating ArrayOfString instead of string[] or List<string>

I am having a minor problem with WCF service proxies where the message contains List<string> as a parameter.
I am using the 'Add Service reference' in Visual Studio to generate a reference to my service.
// portion of my web service message
public List<SubscribeInfo> Subscribe { get; set; }
public List<string> Unsubscribe { get; set; }
These are the generated properties on my MsgIn for one of my web methods.
You can see it used ArrayOfString when I am using List<string>, and the other takes List<SubscribeInfo> - which matches my original C# object above.
[System.Runtime.Serialization.DataMemberAttribute(EmitDefaultValue=false)]
public System.Collections.Generic.List<DataAccess.MailingListWSReference.SubscribeInfo> Subscribe {
get {
return this.SubscribeField;
}
set {
if ((object.ReferenceEquals(this.SubscribeField, value) != true)) {
this.SubscribeField = value;
this.RaisePropertyChanged("Subscribe");
}
}
}
[System.Runtime.Serialization.DataMemberAttribute(EmitDefaultValue=false)]
publicDataAccess.MailingListWSReference.ArrayOfString Unsubscribe {
get {
return this.UnsubscribeField;
}
set {
if ((object.ReferenceEquals(this.UnsubscribeField, value) != true)) {
this.UnsubscribeField = value;
this.RaisePropertyChanged("Unsubscribe");
}
}
}
The ArrayOfString class generated looks like this. This is a class generated in my code - its not a .NET class. It actually generated me a class that inherits from List, but didn't have the 'decency' to create me any constructors.
[System.Diagnostics.DebuggerStepThroughAttribute()]
[System.CodeDom.Compiler.GeneratedCodeAttribute("System.Runtime.Serialization", "3.0.0.0")]
[System.Runtime.Serialization.CollectionDataContractAttribute(Name="ArrayOfString", Namespace="http://www.example.com/", ItemName="string")]
[System.SerializableAttribute()]
public class ArrayOfString : System.Collections.Generic.List<string> {
}
The problem is that I often create my message like this :
client.UpdateMailingList(new UpdateMailingListMsgIn()
{
Email = model.Email,
Name = model.Name,
Source = Request.Url.ToString(),
Subscribe = subscribeTo.ToList(),
Unsubscribe = unsubscribeFrom.ToList()
});
I really like the clean look this gives me.
Now for the actual problem :
I cant assign a List<string> to the Unsubscribe property which is an ArrayOfString - even though it inherits from List. In fact I cant seem to find ANY way to assign it without extra statements.
I've tried the following :
new ArrayOfString(unsubscribeFrom.ToList()) - this constructor doesn't exist :-(
changing the type of the array used by the code generator - doesn't work - it always gives me ArrayOfString (!?)
try to cast List<string> to ArrayOfString - fails with 'unable to cast', even though it compiles just fine
create new ArrayOfString() and then AddRange(unsubscribeFrom.ToList()) - works, but I cant do it all in one statement
create a conversion function ToArrayOfString(List<string>), which works but isn't as clean as I want.
Its only doing this for string, which is annoying.
Am i missing something? Is there a way to tell it not to generate ArrayOfString - or some other trick to assign it ?
Any .NET object that implements a method named "Add" can be initialized just like arrays or dictionaries.
As ArrayOfString does implement an "Add" method, you can initialize it like this:
var a = new ArrayOfString { "string one", "string two" };
But, if you really want to initialize it based on another collection, you can write a extension method for that:
public static class U
{
public static T To<T>(this IEnumerable<string> strings)
where T : IList<string>, new()
{
var newList = new T();
foreach (var s in strings)
newList.Add(s);
return newList;
}
}
Usage:
client.UpdateMailingList(new UpdateMailingListMsgIn()
{
Email = model.Email,
Name = model.Name,
Source = Request.Url.ToString(),
Subscribe = subscribeTo.ToList(),
Unsubscribe = unsubscribeFrom.To<ArrayOfString>()
});
I prefer not to return generic types across a service boundary in the first place. Instead return Unsubscribe as a string[], and SubscriptionInfo as SubscriptionInfo[]. If necessary, an array can easily be converted to a generic list on the client, as follows:
Unsubscribe = new List<string>(unsubscribeFrom);
Subscribe = new List<SubscriptionInfo>(subscribeTo);
Too late but can help people in the future...
Use the svcutil and explicitly inform the command line util that you want the proxy class to be serialized by the XmlSerializer and not the DataContractSerializer (default). Here's the sample:
svcutil /out:c:\Path\Proxy.cs /config:c:\Path\Proxy.config /async /serializer:XmlSerializer /namespace:*,YourNamespace http://www.domain.com/service/serviceURL.asmx
Note that the web service is an ASP.NET web service ok?!
If you are using VS 2008 to consume service then there is an easy solution.
Click on the "Advanced..." button on the proxy dialog that is displayed when you add a Service Reference. In the Collection Type drop down you can select System.Generic.List. The methods returning List should now work properly.
(Hope this is what you were asking for, I'm a little tired and the question was a tad difficult for me to read.)