I see, having a seperate mapper instance and disabling (sort of).
Hope it solves your case ✌🏼✌🏼
On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 11:35:51 PM UTC+9 Ken Hancock wrote:
> Success. I used the setAnnotationIntrospector to essentially remove the
> @JsonAnyGetter():
>
> ObjectMapper mapper = new ObjectMapper();
>
> mapper.setAnnotationIntrospector(new JacksonAnnotationIntrospector() {
> @Override
> public Boolean hasAnyGetter(final Annotated m) {
> return false;
> }
> });
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 8:19 AM Ken Hancock <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I think so, but that was my original question -- I couldn't figure out
>> how to customize the master to drop that field.
>>
>> On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 9:15:49 PM UTC-4 Joo Hyuk Kim (Vince)
>> wrote:
>>
>>> There was similar issue in jackson-databind
>>> <https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-databind/issues/1376> Github ,
>>> but the issue is per-class declaration usecase.
>>>
>>> If we can have a differently configured mapper, how about....
>>>
>>> 1. Copy the global mapper via `mapper.copy()`
>>> 2. Add custom de/serializer to the new mapper from (1)
>>> 3. The custom de/serializer from (2) will handle de/serialization for
>>> specific cases?
>>>
>>> ... this, might work?
>>> On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 3:59:26 AM UTC+9 Ken Hancock wrote:
>>>
>>>> I can't remove the @JsonAnySetter and @JsonAnyGetter as
>>>>
>>>> (1) those are generated automatically from the schema
>>>> (2) in the nominal use case I want to preserve the additional properties
>>>>
>>>> It's only in one special case where I'm sending data to an external
>>>> system that I need to strip them off, hence I'd like to be able to
>>>> configure that at runtime via a differently configured mapper.
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 5:30:35 AM UTC-4 Joo Hyuk Kim (Vince)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> > if I drop on...
>>>>>
>>>>> Though I am not sure what you mean by "dropping on", but as far as I
>>>>> understood....
>>>>>
>>>>> ```java
>>>>>
>>>>> SimpleObject *simpleObject *= new SimpleObject();
>>>>>
>>>>> *simpleObject*.setSingleField("onlyField");
>>>>>
>>>>> *simpleObject*.setAdditionalProperty("additional", "additional");
>>>>>
>>>>> *simpleObject*.setAdditionalProperty("remains", "remains");
>>>>>
>>>>> ```
>>>>>
>>>>> ...should serialize into `{"singleField":"onlyIfeld"}`.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And JSON string `{"onlyField": "someValue", "additional":
>>>>> "anotherValue"}` should deserialize into an instance of `SimpleObject`
>>>>> class with "onlyField" as its singleField and empty map?
>>>>>
>>>>> Try simply removing `@JsonAnySetter` and `@JsonAnyGetter`.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hope it helps,
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks
>>>>> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 11:59:36 PM UTC+9 Ken Hancock wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Vince,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I'm understanding the implementation of mapper.convertVaue(), I
>>>>>> think it doesn't matter whether it's on serialization or deserialization
>>>>>> since convertValue() does both.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To illustrate, let's say I have a pojo with one field and the
>>>>>> anySetter/anyGetter:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @JsonProperty("onlyField")
>>>>>> private String onlyField;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @JsonAnyGetter
>>>>>> public Map<String, Object> getAdditionalProperties() {
>>>>>> return this.additionalProperties;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @JsonAnySetter
>>>>>> public void setAdditionalProperty(String name, Object value) {
>>>>>> this.additionalProperties.put(name, value);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I deserialize {"onlyField": "someValue", "additional":
>>>>>> "anotherValue"}, I end up with a pojo with object.getOnlyField() ==
>>>>>> "someValue") and object.getAdditionalProperties().get("additional") ==
>>>>>> "anotherValue")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now when I call mapper.convertValue(object, MyPojo.class):
>>>>>> if I drop on serialization, I end up with a serialized object of
>>>>>> {"onlyField": "someValue"}
>>>>>> if I drop on deserialize, I start with a serialized object of
>>>>>> {"onlyField": "someValue", "additional": "anotherValue"} but end up with
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> pojo with an empty map in object.getAditionalProperties().
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I can do it at either step, I'd love to know how, but either one
>>>>>> will solve my current problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's a gist with a sample, which currently fails:
>>>>>> https://gist.github.com/hancockks/02509e5d06b0f1d95b1e3e6c4a23a9f1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Saturday, August 12, 2023 at 8:31:54 AM UTC-4 Joo Hyuk Kim (김주혁)
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello Ken,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To make things clear, a few questions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Meaning of "to strip any additional properties before writing
>>>>>>> an object". Are you looking to exclude `additionalProperties` only
>>>>>>> during
>>>>>>> serialization, but include in deserialization?
>>>>>>> - Is the primary intent to generate a JSON output that does not
>>>>>>> include `additionalProperties`, or is there another objective?
>>>>>>> - Could you also provide a simple, reproducible example using
>>>>>>> just Jackson and Java?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Joo Hyuk, Kim (Vince)
>>>>>>> On Saturday, August 12, 2023 at 1:31:13 AM UTC+9 Ken Hancock wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have a pojo that serializes any additional properties into
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> @JsonAnyGetter
>>>>>>>> public Map<String, Object> getAdditionalProperties() {
>>>>>>>> return this.additionalProperties;
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> @JsonAnySetter
>>>>>>>> public void setAdditionalProperty(String name, Object value) {
>>>>>>>> this.additionalProperties.put(name, value);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> However, I have an odd use case where I want to be able to strip
>>>>>>>> any additional properties before writing an object. I'm fairly sure
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>> all of Jackson's configuration settings that I should be able to
>>>>>>>> configure
>>>>>>>> a mapper such that mapper.convertValue(myPojo, MyPojo.class) should be
>>>>>>>> able
>>>>>>>> to serialize and deserialize back again, dropping the
>>>>>>>> additionalProperties
>>>>>>>> when it serializes? The pojo is deeply nested and auto-generated, so
>>>>>>>> I'd
>>>>>>>> prefer not to hard-code having to just clear additionalProperties at
>>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>>> sub-object.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ken
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "jackson-user" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jackson-user/de0ff137-4ffe-445c-b6f5-f345ecc5caecn%40googlegroups.com
>>
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jackson-user/de0ff137-4ffe-445c-b6f5-f345ecc5caecn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jackson-user" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jackson-user/6a53c4e0-0946-4126-8366-8c2a9a56060an%40googlegroups.com.
