to XML() or to JSON.parse() ?

[Pierre]

Hi everyone,

I'd prefer JSON.parse() but in most case i have to fall back on XML()

for example given a list

alist= ["it's ok","I'm late"]

If an AJAX function returns something of the form:

 return json.dumps(dict(alist=alist, astring='abcd'))




then JSON.parse() can cope with it

howewer if it returns a 'hybrid' type like:

return dict(astring='abcd', ajson=json.dumps(alist))

then the json part can only be decoded by XML()

Is this what's expected ? Or do i miss something ?

third option would be 'very deep snorkeling'

[Anthony]

Whenever an action returns a dictionary, web2py looks for and executes an associated view (and if a view is not found, it uses a generic view if the generic view has been enabled). Are you returning a dictionary because you want to execute a view, or do you simply want to return the entire dictionary converted to JSON? If the latter, wrap the entire dictionary in json.dumps(). If the former, what does the view look like?

Anthony

[Pierre]

Yes I want to execute a view here is the example code:

Controller:

from json import dumps as jdumps

def abtest():
    alist = ["it's ok","I'm late"]
    return dict(stra='abcd', obj=jdumps(alist))

View:

{{extend 'layout.html'}}
<h1>Ceci est le modèle test/abtest.html </h1>
<h1 id='result'>
    RESULT
</h1>

<script>
var o= "{{=obj}}";
var po = JSON.parse(o);
console.log(po);
jQuery("#result").html(po);
</script>

JSON decode error:

SyntaxError: JSON.parse: unexpected character at line 1 column 2 of the JSON data

[Anthony]

Yes, as usual, if you want to prevent escaping in the view, you must wrap with XML(). Another options is:

Controller:

    return dict(stra='abcd', obj=alist) # No JSON conversion needed here.


View:

<script>
{{=ASSIGNJS(o=obj)}}
...

The ASSIGNJS helper will handle everything.

Anthony

[Pierre]

thanks Anthony

I'll use ASSIGNJS. I'd never heard of this helper.....too bad it's unpublished in the book....

[lyn2py]

new helper?

[Massimo Di Pierro]

It has been around for more than one year. It is an oversight that it is not in the book.

[Dave S]

On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 7:48:36 AM UTC-7, Massimo Di Pierro wrote:

It has been around for more than one year. It is an oversight that it is not in the book.

I noticed that when I was looking up the posts.  Nov '14.

/dps