Support Map types

[Wavesonics]

Lists are supported, adding support for Map types would be very helpful.

[ttung]

What do you envision being parsed into maps?

[Wavesonics]

For parsing something like:

{
  "AMap" :
  [
    "Key1" : "value1",
    "Key2" : "value2"
  ]
}

Into:

class Foo
{
  public Map<String, String> aMap;
}

[ttung]

So a fixed type for the value?

[Wavesonics]

Yeah. Can't think of a good way to arbitrarily parse value objects. But having a map with a single value type would still solve most of the cases I think. Certainly my own cases.

[jacobtabak]

Check out GSON's implementation - https://github.com/eatnumber1/google-gson/blob/master/src/main/java/com/google/gson/MapTypeAdapter.java

[Wavesonics]

Taking my first baby steps with ig-json and it looks pretty great so far. I was going to take a crack at implementing parsing for map types, any suggestions on where to start, things to look out for?

[ttung]

@Wavesonics the logic would be pretty similar to what is done for list/sets right now.

[Wavesonics]

@ttung so I spent some time on this today, I have it deserializing String,String Maps (sort of), however the major hurdle is the fact that everything is written with the assumption that there would only ever be one parameterized type.

  TypeData.mParseType

So I'm working on refactoring JsonAnnotationProcessor.processFieldAnnotation() to be able to discern multiple parameterized types, and for TypeData to store a list rather than a single type. This has knock on effects I think with mPackageName and mParsableType also needing to be Lists.

This creates some complications in places that access those fields. However the larger concern is JsonParserClassData.mArraySerializeCalls(), currently it's a one-to-one mapping of type to string. That won't be feasible with multiple parameters as we'd need every permutation.

Having written the code originally, do you have any thoughts on a better way to support multiple type parameters?

[ttung]

@Wavesonics I'm curious why you think having multiple types is a good idea. How would the code determine which type to map to (scalars being exempted)?

[ttung]

this is supported as of https://github.com/Instagram/ig-json-parser/commit/374fca68675809ce19c1bfb7ce59c772a6c2c382. it has also been released to maven as the 0.0.5 release.