Input::json should not convert object to array

[aleemb]

When trying to pass around an object, Input::json() returns an array instead. When the request payload contains the following JSON object:

{"name":"John", "age":30}

The expected behavior should be:

$person = Input::json();
$person->name; // doesn't work

Instead each object property must be accessed as an array:

$person = Input::json();
$person['name'];

This used to work fine before the array_get call added somewhere around cd9fcd0.

[JoostK]

This has nothing to do with the array_get call, but the second argument to json_decode. This has been changed to true to get an associative array instead of an object, because then we can easily select a key with array_get.

There is no way really to do something about this for everyone. If you really want an object, do a cast or simply override Input::json (the class behind the facade, then set subclasses instance in the app container) to roll you own implementation.

[bencorlett]

I much prefer how it is now.

[taylorotwell]

Yeah, just do $person = (object) Input::json();

[aleemb]

The above proposed solution only works for simple objects. For the following nested object:

{'person': {'name':'John', 'age':30, 'address': {'zip':12345,'state':'CA'} } }

...the only strategy is to recursively convert the inner-most objects and then construct the parent object. Right now I am sending objects in one end and getting associative arrays out the other which becomes annoying.

[bencorlett]

There is nothing that makes StdClass more appropriate to map "javascript objects" than an associative array does in PHP. Arrays are much nicer.

Have a geez out there for something to recursively convert to StdClass should you really require it. It seems more consistent to use arrays here than StdClass.

On 28/02/2013, at 4:33 PM, aleemb [email protected] wrote:

The above proposed solution only works for simple objects. For the following nested object:

{'person': {'name':'John', 'age':30, 'address': {'zip':12345,'state':'CA'} } }
...the only strategy is to do recursively convert the inner-most objects and then construct the parent object. Right now I am sending objects in one and and getting associative arrays out the other which becomes annoying.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[hughsmith10]

The problem is I'd like to be able to simulate the data that I get when I'm pulling records from a database. With results from the database, I can use the object->property notation, but apparently Laravel is having problems letting me pass data to templates when I convert an array to an object (using the code shown below):

class T {
  public static function arrayToObject($array){
    return json_decode(json_encode($array));
  }
}

Then, when I do this in my Laravel controller:

$data = T::arrayToObject($data);
return View::make('blade-template')->with($data);

I get this error: Illegal offset type

And when I try this in Laravel controller:

$data = T::arrayToObject($data);
return View::make('blade-template',$data);

I get this error: array_merge(): Argument #2 is not an array

Any suggestions?

I'd definitely prefer to use object notation instead of arrays in my templates.

Thank you in advance for taking the time to look at this... I appreciate all of your help!

[vdh]

@bencorlett

There is nothing that makes StdClass more appropriate to map "javascript objects" than an associative array does in PHP. Arrays are much nicer.

Not true, this wrecks empty objects:

json_encode(json_decode('{}')); // '{}'
json_encode(json_decode('{}', true)); // '[]'

I'm sorry to reply to a 4 year old post, but this sort of horrible misconception really ruins the integrity of JSON data and makes my life hell when PHP devs do this with reckless abandon.

[bencorlett]

Nice work, good edge case.

[ruudy-es]

The mainly problem here is you are assuming one or other way works for everyone, limiting the flexibility and providing a tool that we must tweak in order to cover base cases in API concept.

{} and [] are valid values and different structures in json format.

{}: empty object
[]: empty array / collection

I think to store them in a Documents DB make sense, and to use a Documents DB on laravel is possible, so...

Wont be more flexible to do not force the json_decode with true and allow users to decide by config option or something like that?

[klis87]

Why this issue is closed? I need to save very a complex json object (wysiwig internal representation) as JSON field in DB. Currently Laravel casts {} into [] and '' into null, breaking my wysiwig when I get transformed JSON back.

I know that php is dynamic language, but so is JS, and changing object structure without programmer's knowledge because this is convenient is just plainly irresponsible.

[davidvalen95]

knew that this old post, but i just stumbled in this problem.
solution:
we can retrieve true JSON from the request with this method
$json = json_decode($request->getContent(),**false**); default for second argument is false but just to emphasize on it

explanation:
the $request->getContent() is giving raw request body thus, a correct syntax of encoded_json can be decoded with json_decode