Description

gdub

opened on Aug 22, 2022

Issue body actions

>>> rapidjson.dumps({1}, iterable_mode=rapidjson.IM_ANY_ITERABLE)
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: {1} is not JSON serializable

>>> rapidjson.__version__
'1.8'

Given that documentation states "any iterable will be dumped as a JSON array," I would expect a set object to serialize to an array.

Note, it does appear that creating an iterator object from the set will successfully serialize:

>>> rapidjson.dumps(iter({1}), iterable_mode=rapidjson.IM_ANY_ITERABLE)
'[1]'

Reacted by Aziz Khoury and janw

Activity

1. lelit commented on Aug 23, 2022

   

   lelit

   on Aug 23, 2022

   Contributor

   More actions

   Thank you for the report, I will try to understand and fix the issue.
2. lelit commented on Aug 23, 2022

   

   lelit

   on Aug 23, 2022

   Contributor

   More actions

   I'm not sure if/how this should be fixed...
   On one hand, I realize that IM_ANY_ITERABLE (that by the way is the default for iterable_mode) suggests that it should slurp anything for which iter(X) works, but under the hood it is actually implemented as PyIter_Check(), and thus it is currently misleading.
   On the other hand, I'm reluctant to effectively rectify its implementation, because that could break existing usages: doing that for example breaks three tests, this to mention one.
   I will think about this, or wait for some feedback 😜
3. akhoury commented on Nov 8, 2022

   

   akhoury

   on Nov 8, 2022

   More actions

   running into this issue as well
4. lelit commented on Nov 8, 2022

   

   lelit

   on Nov 8, 2022

   Contributor

   More actions

   I started hacking on this, but got distracted away, sorry. I will try to refocus, as time permits.

   Reacted by Aziz Khoury and Anna Pekarska
5. NothisIm commented on May 5, 2023

   

   NothisIm

   on May 5, 2023

   More actions

   hi @lelit
   any updates on this? would be really cool to get this fixed 🙏
6. lelit commented on May 5, 2023

   

   lelit

   on May 5, 2023

   Contributor

   More actions

   No, sorry 🤦‍♂️
7. lelit commented on Oct 16, 2026

   

   lelit

   on Oct 16, 2026

   Contributor

   More actions

   First of all, I'm sorry this is taking so long.

   I reviewed PR #246, and I'm still unsure whether that is the right move here. I'm flip/flopping between two point of views...

   1. IM_ANY_ITERABLE is too broad: should be deprecated and replaced by IM_ANY_ITERATOR, what it really means now
   2. Ok, «practicality beats purity», and sets are a rather common and important iterable to be merit a special treatment

Issue actions