ValueTuples lose their property names when serialized












8















While trying to serialize a named value tuple to JSON string, it loses the names assigned to items



(string type, string text) myTypes = ("A", "I am an animal");

var cnvValue = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(myTypes);


I am expecting the serialized value as




{"type":"A","text":"I am an animal"}




but the actual results are




{"Item1":"A","Item2":"I am an animal"}




There are two things that i am interested to know




  • Why does it behave like that

  • How to get the expected output






c# json.net tuples valuetuple







share|improve this question

























  • FYI github.com/JamesNK/Newtonsoft.Json/issues/1505

    – John
    3 hours ago
















8















While trying to serialize a named value tuple to JSON string, it loses the names assigned to items



(string type, string text) myTypes = ("A", "I am an animal");

var cnvValue = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(myTypes);


I am expecting the serialized value as




{"type":"A","text":"I am an animal"}




but the actual results are




{"Item1":"A","Item2":"I am an animal"}




There are two things that i am interested to know




  • Why does it behave like that

  • How to get the expected output






c# json.net tuples valuetuple







share|improve this question

























  • FYI github.com/JamesNK/Newtonsoft.Json/issues/1505

    – John
    3 hours ago














8












8








8








While trying to serialize a named value tuple to JSON string, it loses the names assigned to items



(string type, string text) myTypes = ("A", "I am an animal");

var cnvValue = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(myTypes);


I am expecting the serialized value as




{"type":"A","text":"I am an animal"}




but the actual results are




{"Item1":"A","Item2":"I am an animal"}




There are two things that i am interested to know




  • Why does it behave like that

  • How to get the expected output






c# json.net tuples valuetuple







share|improve this question
















While trying to serialize a named value tuple to JSON string, it loses the names assigned to items



(string type, string text) myTypes = ("A", "I am an animal");

var cnvValue = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(myTypes);


I am expecting the serialized value as




{"type":"A","text":"I am an animal"}




but the actual results are




{"Item1":"A","Item2":"I am an animal"}




There are two things that i am interested to know




  • Why does it behave like that

  • How to get the expected output






c# json.net tuples valuetuple




c# json.net tuples valuetuple






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 3 hours ago









Caius Jard

11.2k21138




11.2k21138










asked 3 hours ago









mdowesmdowes

597




597













  • FYI github.com/JamesNK/Newtonsoft.Json/issues/1505

    – John
    3 hours ago



















  • FYI github.com/JamesNK/Newtonsoft.Json/issues/1505

    – John
    3 hours ago

















FYI github.com/JamesNK/Newtonsoft.Json/issues/1505

– John
3 hours ago





FYI github.com/JamesNK/Newtonsoft.Json/issues/1505

– John
3 hours ago












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















7















How to get the expected output




Something like this:



var myTypes = new{ type = "A", text = "I am an animal"};

var cnvValue = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(myTypes);


should work if you’re looking for a similarly terse approach. Doesn’t use ValueTuples (but anonymous types) under the hood though; this is my interpreting your question as “how can I produce this expected JSON without going to the full extent of declaring a class etc”






share|improve this answer


























  • You interpreted it in the correct sense. I used ValueTuples to do exactly that.

    – mdowes
    2 hours ago



















11














The names are a compiler trick. If you look at the definition for ValueTuple you'll see that its field names are just Item1, Item2, etc.



Since JsonConvert.SerializeObject was compiled well before you assigned names that you could use during your compilation, it cannot recover the names.



Method parameters/return types are decorated with attributes that indicate the names to be used when a method's signature includes ValueTuples. This allows code authored later to "see" the names by the compiler playing tricks again, but that's the "wrong way around" to be of much use here.




How to get the expected output




Introduce an explicit type, if the names of the fields/properties are so important.






share|improve this answer


























  • Important to note that the explicit type could be an anonymous type.

    – Avner Shahar-Kashtan
    3 hours ago






  • 2





    @AvnerShahar-Kashtan Anonymous type are not explicit anyway

    – Rahul
    3 hours ago











  • I do not want to create an explicit type to use it only once. But still I want the names of items to appear in JSON string.

    – mdowes
    2 hours ago











  • If you want the better names, you need to at least use an anonymous type, or a named type. ValueTuple will not help you, as you've seen.

    – Lasse Vågsæther Karlsen
    2 hours ago











Your Answer






StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54397927%2fvaluetuples-lose-their-property-names-when-serialized%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









7















How to get the expected output




Something like this:



var myTypes = new{ type = "A", text = "I am an animal"};

var cnvValue = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(myTypes);


should work if you’re looking for a similarly terse approach. Doesn’t use ValueTuples (but anonymous types) under the hood though; this is my interpreting your question as “how can I produce this expected JSON without going to the full extent of declaring a class etc”






share|improve this answer


























  • You interpreted it in the correct sense. I used ValueTuples to do exactly that.

    – mdowes
    2 hours ago
















7















How to get the expected output




Something like this:



var myTypes = new{ type = "A", text = "I am an animal"};

var cnvValue = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(myTypes);


should work if you’re looking for a similarly terse approach. Doesn’t use ValueTuples (but anonymous types) under the hood though; this is my interpreting your question as “how can I produce this expected JSON without going to the full extent of declaring a class etc”






share|improve this answer


























  • You interpreted it in the correct sense. I used ValueTuples to do exactly that.

    – mdowes
    2 hours ago














7












7








7








How to get the expected output




Something like this:



var myTypes = new{ type = "A", text = "I am an animal"};

var cnvValue = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(myTypes);


should work if you’re looking for a similarly terse approach. Doesn’t use ValueTuples (but anonymous types) under the hood though; this is my interpreting your question as “how can I produce this expected JSON without going to the full extent of declaring a class etc”






share|improve this answer
















How to get the expected output




Something like this:



var myTypes = new{ type = "A", text = "I am an animal"};

var cnvValue = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(myTypes);


should work if you’re looking for a similarly terse approach. Doesn’t use ValueTuples (but anonymous types) under the hood though; this is my interpreting your question as “how can I produce this expected JSON without going to the full extent of declaring a class etc”







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 5 mins ago









Mafii

5,11212244




5,11212244










answered 3 hours ago









Caius JardCaius Jard

11.2k21138




11.2k21138













  • You interpreted it in the correct sense. I used ValueTuples to do exactly that.

    – mdowes
    2 hours ago



















  • You interpreted it in the correct sense. I used ValueTuples to do exactly that.

    – mdowes
    2 hours ago

















You interpreted it in the correct sense. I used ValueTuples to do exactly that.

– mdowes
2 hours ago





You interpreted it in the correct sense. I used ValueTuples to do exactly that.

– mdowes
2 hours ago













11














The names are a compiler trick. If you look at the definition for ValueTuple you'll see that its field names are just Item1, Item2, etc.



Since JsonConvert.SerializeObject was compiled well before you assigned names that you could use during your compilation, it cannot recover the names.



Method parameters/return types are decorated with attributes that indicate the names to be used when a method's signature includes ValueTuples. This allows code authored later to "see" the names by the compiler playing tricks again, but that's the "wrong way around" to be of much use here.




How to get the expected output




Introduce an explicit type, if the names of the fields/properties are so important.






share|improve this answer


























  • Important to note that the explicit type could be an anonymous type.

    – Avner Shahar-Kashtan
    3 hours ago






  • 2





    @AvnerShahar-Kashtan Anonymous type are not explicit anyway

    – Rahul
    3 hours ago











  • I do not want to create an explicit type to use it only once. But still I want the names of items to appear in JSON string.

    – mdowes
    2 hours ago











  • If you want the better names, you need to at least use an anonymous type, or a named type. ValueTuple will not help you, as you've seen.

    – Lasse Vågsæther Karlsen
    2 hours ago
















11














The names are a compiler trick. If you look at the definition for ValueTuple you'll see that its field names are just Item1, Item2, etc.



Since JsonConvert.SerializeObject was compiled well before you assigned names that you could use during your compilation, it cannot recover the names.



Method parameters/return types are decorated with attributes that indicate the names to be used when a method's signature includes ValueTuples. This allows code authored later to "see" the names by the compiler playing tricks again, but that's the "wrong way around" to be of much use here.




How to get the expected output




Introduce an explicit type, if the names of the fields/properties are so important.






share|improve this answer


























  • Important to note that the explicit type could be an anonymous type.

    – Avner Shahar-Kashtan
    3 hours ago






  • 2





    @AvnerShahar-Kashtan Anonymous type are not explicit anyway

    – Rahul
    3 hours ago











  • I do not want to create an explicit type to use it only once. But still I want the names of items to appear in JSON string.

    – mdowes
    2 hours ago











  • If you want the better names, you need to at least use an anonymous type, or a named type. ValueTuple will not help you, as you've seen.

    – Lasse Vågsæther Karlsen
    2 hours ago














11












11








11







The names are a compiler trick. If you look at the definition for ValueTuple you'll see that its field names are just Item1, Item2, etc.



Since JsonConvert.SerializeObject was compiled well before you assigned names that you could use during your compilation, it cannot recover the names.



Method parameters/return types are decorated with attributes that indicate the names to be used when a method's signature includes ValueTuples. This allows code authored later to "see" the names by the compiler playing tricks again, but that's the "wrong way around" to be of much use here.




How to get the expected output




Introduce an explicit type, if the names of the fields/properties are so important.






share|improve this answer















The names are a compiler trick. If you look at the definition for ValueTuple you'll see that its field names are just Item1, Item2, etc.



Since JsonConvert.SerializeObject was compiled well before you assigned names that you could use during your compilation, it cannot recover the names.



Method parameters/return types are decorated with attributes that indicate the names to be used when a method's signature includes ValueTuples. This allows code authored later to "see" the names by the compiler playing tricks again, but that's the "wrong way around" to be of much use here.




How to get the expected output




Introduce an explicit type, if the names of the fields/properties are so important.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 3 hours ago

























answered 3 hours ago









Damien_The_UnbelieverDamien_The_Unbeliever

194k17246334




194k17246334













  • Important to note that the explicit type could be an anonymous type.

    – Avner Shahar-Kashtan
    3 hours ago






  • 2





    @AvnerShahar-Kashtan Anonymous type are not explicit anyway

    – Rahul
    3 hours ago











  • I do not want to create an explicit type to use it only once. But still I want the names of items to appear in JSON string.

    – mdowes
    2 hours ago











  • If you want the better names, you need to at least use an anonymous type, or a named type. ValueTuple will not help you, as you've seen.

    – Lasse Vågsæther Karlsen
    2 hours ago



















  • Important to note that the explicit type could be an anonymous type.

    – Avner Shahar-Kashtan
    3 hours ago






  • 2





    @AvnerShahar-Kashtan Anonymous type are not explicit anyway

    – Rahul
    3 hours ago











  • I do not want to create an explicit type to use it only once. But still I want the names of items to appear in JSON string.

    – mdowes
    2 hours ago











  • If you want the better names, you need to at least use an anonymous type, or a named type. ValueTuple will not help you, as you've seen.

    – Lasse Vågsæther Karlsen
    2 hours ago

















Important to note that the explicit type could be an anonymous type.

– Avner Shahar-Kashtan
3 hours ago





Important to note that the explicit type could be an anonymous type.

– Avner Shahar-Kashtan
3 hours ago




2




2





@AvnerShahar-Kashtan Anonymous type are not explicit anyway

– Rahul
3 hours ago





@AvnerShahar-Kashtan Anonymous type are not explicit anyway

– Rahul
3 hours ago













I do not want to create an explicit type to use it only once. But still I want the names of items to appear in JSON string.

– mdowes
2 hours ago





I do not want to create an explicit type to use it only once. But still I want the names of items to appear in JSON string.

– mdowes
2 hours ago













If you want the better names, you need to at least use an anonymous type, or a named type. ValueTuple will not help you, as you've seen.

– Lasse Vågsæther Karlsen
2 hours ago





If you want the better names, you need to at least use an anonymous type, or a named type. ValueTuple will not help you, as you've seen.

– Lasse Vågsæther Karlsen
2 hours ago


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54397927%2fvaluetuples-lose-their-property-names-when-serialized%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

404 Error Contact Form 7 ajax form submitting

Image
0 The contact form does not work, and affects loading after one try. The chrome console shows the error message: POST http://example.com/wp-json/contact-form-7/v1/contact-forms/50/feedback 404 (Not Found) send @ jquery.js?ver=1.12.4:4 ajax @ jquery.js?ver=1.12.4:4 wpcf7.submit @ scripts.js?ver=5.0.3:346 (anonymous) @ scripts.js?ver=5.0.3:53 dispatch @ jquery.js?ver=1.12.4:3 r.handle @ jquery.js?ver=1.12.4:3 How to solve this issue? thanks in advance javascript wordpress contact-form-7 share | improve this question edited Jul 17 '18 at 5:39 Kiran Shahi 4,745 3 16 43 ...
Read more

How to know if a Active Directory user can login interactively

Image
1 I would like to know if and how is it possible to know if a AD user can login interactively (on a server) in a domain. I need to know if I can find it out using a LDAP search. Thanks. windows active-directory login user-permissions user-profile share | improve this question edited 1 hour ago yagmoth555 ♦ 11.6k 3 17 42 asked 1 hour ago Luigi Luigi 6 1 New contributor ...
Read more

Refactoring coordinates for Minecraft Pi buildings written in Python

Image
0 $begingroup$ I'm fairly new to coding and I wrote this script in Python for a house with a roof in Minecraft Pi. I've found different ways to write the coordinates to make the code base shorter, but I'm wondering if it is possible for me to refactor it any further so I don't have to list each coordinate line by line. import mcpi.minecraft as minecraft import mcpi.block as block mc = minecraft.Minecraft.create() p = mc.player.getTilePos() mc.setBlocks(p.x+1, p.y, p.z+1, #Main structure starting coordinates (DO NOT ALTER) p.x+19, p.y+4, p.z+6, #Structure size/coordinates (Alters cube size) block.STONE_BRICK) mc.setBlocks(p.x+2, p.y+1, p.z+2, #Hollowing out main structure interior p.x+18, p.y+3, p.z+5, block.AIR) mc.setBlocks(p.x, p.y...
Read more