On Tuesday, 7 April 2015 at 22:15:13 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
Am 26.03.2015 um 02:38 schrieb Laeeth Isharc:
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 01:04:06 UTC, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 00:41:50 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
Yeah, it is not very intuitive. But it works.
Thanks.
Next question - how can I correctly deal with
inconsiderately chosen
JSON field names like 'private' (which conflict in a struct
declaration with D language keywords). A hack is to do a
search and
replace on the JSON before presenting it to vibe.d, but I
wondered if
there was a better way. Incidentally, vibe doesn't seem to
like my
replacing private with private_ - whereas privateX works.
Laeeth.
Use the @name attribute:
http://vibed.org/api/vibe.data.serialization/name
aha! Thanks. (and to dicebot - I am not sure index-based
access works
as the problem is in parsing stage, not accessing).
If I understood the issue correctly, there is also the
possibility to append an underscore to the D field name in case
of keyword conflicts:
struct S {
int private_; // will be represented as "private"
}
This predated the @name attribute (and UDAs in general) and
today the latter is probably more appropriate.
Thanks, Sonke.
