Reflecting on deserialization. Why you should explicitly decode your JSON
When working with JSON, 99% of the time developers write a custom type that closely matches the format of the JSON payload, and then use their favorite programming languages built in metaprogramming ability to automatically deserialization the payload into a typed object. I want to tell you why you shouldn't use reflection and instead take a page out of functional programming and explicitly decode the JSON payload.
Reflecting on deserialization. Why you should explicitly decode your JSON. JSON is everywhere . As developers, we will be required to work with it at some point or another. Maybe in the embedded space you could avoid it, but as a cloud and web developer, I have no choice but to be intricately familiar with all things JSON. As an enjoyer of statically typed programming languages, I need some way of deserializing the JSON payload into a custom defined type in my language of choice. The techniques talked about here are opinions I hold myself that I have developed over my career and work well for
Explore this link on the map →saved by
related reading
- JSON - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org
- No, dynamic type systems are not inherently more openlexi-lambda.github.io
- Shipping at Inference-Speed | Peter Steinbergersteipete.me
- Parsing JSON Really Quickly: Lessons Learned - InfoQinfoq.com
- JSON Files - Spark 4.1.2 Documentationspark.apache.org
- Schema Registry in Kafka: Avro, JSON and Protobuf | by Ismael Sánchez Chaves | .Net Programming | Mediummedium.com
- The Laws of Reflection - The Go Programming Languagego.dev
- Choosing a faster JSON library for Pythonpythonspeed.com
- Java Serialization: readObject() vs. readResolve() | Baeldungbaeldung.com
- Prompts are code, .json/.md files are statemariozechner.at
- 練習 - 探索資料類型的強制型轉和轉換 - Training | Microsoft Learnlearn.microsoft.com
- The yaml document from hellruudvanasseldonk.com