Avro - toJson should work exactly as toBinary #256
Conversation
| val klass = classTag[T].runtimeClass.asInstanceOf[Class[T]] | ||
| val writer = new SpecificDatumWriter[T](klass) | ||
| val reader = new SpecificDatumReader[T](klass) | ||
| def toJson[T <: SpecificRecordBase: ClassTag]: Injection[T, String] = { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can we add a new method name and not break binary compatibility?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, it's what I suggested when we changed toBinary, but you guys decided it was unnecessary. I'll update the PR.
|
We since added a binary compatibility check to CI and changed the process
|
|
Makes sense. Is the updated PR not binary compatible? Edit: Ah I think there's a formatting error, but I'm not sure what it is. |
|
Failed the scala format test. Can you run sbt scalafmt and commit the changes? |
Current coverage is 66.14% (diff: 100%)@@ develop #256 diff @@
==========================================
Files 50 50
Lines 1394 1397 +3
Methods 1363 1347 -16
Messages 0 0
Branches 31 50 +19
==========================================
+ Hits 921 924 +3
Misses 473 473
Partials 0 0
|
|
Done! |
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /** | ||
| * Returns Injection capable of serializing and deserializing a generic avro record using org.apache.avro.io.JsonEncoder to a | ||
| * UTF-8 String | ||
| * @tparam T compiled Avro record | ||
| * @param schema The record's schema | ||
| * @return Injection | ||
| */ | ||
| def toJson[T <: SpecificRecordBase: ClassTag](schema: Schema): Injection[T, String] = { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd live to remove the ClassTag here if possible, but that would be a binary incompatible break, so we can leave it as a TODO for now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok I added a todo.
| * @param schema The record's schema | ||
| * @return Injection | ||
| */ | ||
| def toBinary[T <: SpecificRecordBase: ClassTag](schema: Schema): Injection[T, Array[Byte]] = { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
does this actually use the ClassTag? I don't see where. If not, since we already dropped it in a previous version, why not correct that issue?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point, done!
…ted Scala case classes as specific records
|
All checks successful, merge away ;) |
|
Thank you! |
Adapt
toJsonto work similarly astoBinaryin order to support generated Scala case classes as specific records.