Omit missing metadata fields from JSON serialization#48
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Assuming that most nodes will omit at least some of the optional metadata fields (e.g. long description, different icon resolutions), I wanted to keep the
FullNodeSetSnapshotserialization concise and readable by omitting all of those fields instead of serializing an explicitnullfor every omitted field.This turned out to be more complex than I had hoped for. You can do it with a simple
#[serde(default, skip_serializing_if = "Option::is_none")]. However, this feature is not supported at all in bincode, so using this attribute makes JSON work nicely and bincode fail to deserialize any object with omitted fields. This requires writing a custom serializer with different behavior based on the value ofis_human_readable, which I tried to do using a macro to avoid duplicate logic for every single field.In the end I'm on the fence about whether this optimization is worth the added complexity but here it is if we think it's worth merging.