-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
Include unanmed JSON values in unnamed ARGS #1577
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
Conversation
Remark: running in prod for more than a month on several (big) servers |
Any chance to accept this PR? |
JSON standrd (rfc8259) explicitely states that a JSON body can contain a stand-alone value. |
This issue was already addressed in v3. To avoid different behaviors in between the version 2 and 3, we need the version 2 to work in the exactly same fashion as v3. There was a comment explain how it works on v3: #1576 (comment) It important to keep v2 and v3 to working in the same fashion. Let me know your considerations on how it was implemented on v3. |
From a functional point of view, it should be closer than the actual situation, no? |
In branch the v2/dev/issue_1576 there is an alternative where the data structure is somewhat navigable, for instance, the JSON: {
"foo":"bar",
"mod":"sec",
"ops":[
[
"um",
"um e meio"
],
"dois",
"tres",
{
"eins":[
"zwei",
"drei"
]
}
],
"whee":"lhebs"
} Will be mapped to:
This is not comprehensive as the v3 solution, but gives the user an opportunity to navigate in the JSON structure. Just for the reference, that would be the mapping with the patch suggested here.
|
Thanks @marcstern. |
The implemented solution fixes most cases but not all. |
Hi @marcstern, Do you mind to create a new issue with an example to illustrate the scenario? |
A JSON request with only a number or a string, nothing else. --29000000-C-- |
Any feedback? |
1 similar comment
Any feedback? |
Issue #1576: unanmed JSON values are not parsed because not included in ARGS.
Include these JSON values in unnamed ARGS to include in parsing