feat: OmitZero and OmitEmpty #30
Conversation
|
I am using This was hard to see with |
|
Apologies for the delay, I've been pondering this. I don't think I like the proliferation of options specific to this. I'm also okay slightly breaking backwards compat while it's still 0.x. WDYT about having |
|
Works for me. I just cobbled this together while I was debugging some things, happy to change it. I imagine we can then piggy-back of the stdlib trick to check for an interface https://cs.opensource.google/go/go/+/master:src/encoding/json/encode.go;drc=97571f36103b045a7e9c15a92e9a35ab95fa6be5;l=1067 before checking for |
|
Agreed, I think it would be good to have the same semantics |
This splits OmitEmpty into OmitEmpty and OmitZero. OmitEmpty will omit anything that is zero as well as a slice and map of length 0. OmitZero only omits the zero type, either by checking the return value of the IsZero method or if that's not implemented by reflect.Value.IsZero. This by default retains the empty map and slice, since initialised but 0-length maps and slices are not zero.
49b4a4e to
fe1114d
Compare
|
I think that should do it. |
| B bool | ||
| ZC zeroTest | ||
| C zeroTest | ||
| }{[]string{}, []string{"a", "b"}, map[string]string{}, map[string]string{"a": "b"}, 0, 1, "", "a", false, true, zeroTest{i: 100}, zeroTest{i: 10}} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For future reference, I think this would be easier to read with a concrete type declared in the function.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the only issue with that is I can't declare functions on those, can I?
Introduce an OmitEmpty option.