python / python/cpython

Allow JSONEncoder to handle passing unsupported dict keys through `.default()` before throwing TypeError

Ouverte
#117,391 1 commentaire 4 réactions 0 personnes assignées Voir sur GitHub

Personne n'a encore pris cette issue.

stdlib type-feature
Langage dominant
Python
Étoiles
77.2k
Forks
35.9k
Métriques de merge des PR
Métriques de PR en attente

Description

Feature or enhancement

Proposal:

Encoding a dict to JSON raises TypeError if a key is not one of the simple types natively supported by JSON (bool, None, int, float, str).

However, some other types of objects are "JSON-like" enough that users commonly use them as keys, and it would be handy to be able to dump such dicts to JSON format. For values, this is supported via the encoder's .default() method, but for keys there isn't a current way to accomplish this other than manually processing the dict to convert all such keys before passing it to JSONEncoder. It can't be handled in .default() as a dict doesn't get passed to .default().

Example objects that are not simple types but used as keys (I've used all these myself):

to_encode = {
    b"foobar": "bytes key",
    pathlib.Path("/tmp"): "Path key",
    uuid.uuid4(): "UUID key",
    ipaddress.ip_address("127.0.0.1"): "IP address key",
}

Calling json.dumps() on such a dict will raise TypeError: keys must be str, int, float, bool or None, not bytes, even if you try to subclass JSONEncoder and handle a dict's keys in .default().

I have a patch that adds an optional kwarg convert_keys that, when set, causes the encoder to pass such keys through the encoder's .default() method, and only raise an exception if that does not return one of the JSON-supported types. It defaults to off, and skipkeys still takes precedence over the new setting, so existing uses will see no change in behaviour.

I did search for discussions of this, but didn't find anything related, only other proposals like adding a JSON dunder method so any object can control its JSON serialization, which is a different approach. I believe my approach is much more similar to the way values are currently handled, and will therefore be more familiar to users.

Has this already been discussed elsewhere?

This is a minor feature, which does not need previous discussion elsewhere

Links to previous discussion of this feature:

No response

Linked PRs
  • gh-117392

Guide de contribution

Ouvrir le guide de contribution

Par où commencer

  1. Lisez l'issue en entier, puis le guide de contribution du projet.
  2. Signalez en commentaire que vous la prenez — cela évite que deux personnes fassent le même travail.
  3. Forkez le dépôt et travaillez sur une branche.
  4. Ouvrez une pull request qui référence le numéro de l'issue.

Piste de recherche

Commencez par la gestion des clés de JSONEncoder de Python et son chemin default() existant ; l'issue ne nomme ni fichier source ni test. Examinez la PR liée gh-117392 et confirmez que la conversion facultative des clés préserve le comportement existant, respecte skipkeys et ne provoque une erreur que lorsque la conversion ne produit pas un type de clé pris en charge par JSON.

Rédigé par le modèle d'indexation à partir du texte de l'issue.

Évaluation

Stack technique
python
Domaine
backend
Type d'issue
Fonctionnalité
Difficulté
4/5
Temps estimé
3-5 jours
Activité
À l'abandon
Clarté
Plutôt claire
Accessibilité débutants
25/100

Recevez les nouvelles issues par e-mail

Un résumé court des issues GitHub adaptées aux débutants.