If you haven't got this working yet, one possible solution is to return
anonymous inner AbstractJSObject that returns true for isFunction calls:
public Object getMember(String name) {
if ("map".equals(name)) {
return new AbstractJSObject() {
@Override
public Object call(Object thiz, Object... args) {
// delegate to your JsonArray.map method from this
annonymous inner class
// in your example nashorn should pass you a single instance
of ScriptObjectMirror for args that returns true for isFunction() call
}
@Override
public boolean isFunction() {
return true;
}
};
}
return null;
}
Hope that helps!
Jesse
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 1:11 PM Daniel Einspanjer <deinspan...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I have a project that makes extensive use of the Google Gson library.
>
> In this particular case, I have a JsonArray object (which implements
> iterable) containing a collection of objects. In pure JSON it would look
> like this:
>
> [ 1, true, {"a": "b"}, [1,2] ]
>
> In Gson JsonElements, it looks like this:
>
> arr = new JsonArray();
> arr.add(1);
> arr.add(true);
>
> obj = new JsonObject();
> obj.addProperty("a", "b");
>
> arr.add(obj);
>
> innerArr = new JsonArray();
> innerArr.add(1);
> innerArr.add(2);
>
> arr.add(innerArr);
>
> I am calling a Javascript function in Nashorn that is trying to do a map
> over this array:
>
> nash.eval("function doIt(arr) { print(arr.map(function(item) { return
> (typeof item); })); }");
>
> So, in order for this to work with my own arbitrary object (JsonArray), I
> believe I need to implement JSObject.
>
> I created the wrapper class that implements it, using the underlying
> JsonArray object as a delegate. things like isArray() and such are
> trivial, but I'm having trouble with the map.
> I have a map method that takes a functional interface which is available
> for the JsonArray object.
>
> Nashorn calls getMember("map") when the doIt function is executed. I
> cannot figure out how to give it an appropriate function reference to my
> JsonArray.map method.
> I was able to handle getMember("toString") easily enough, but the problem
> is that method doesn't take any arguments, so returning a simple
> Callable<Object> is fine for it, but map is going to take arguments that I
> don't know about ahead of time.
>
> I would really appreciate some assistance here. Thanks.
>
> -Daniel
>
