Unified API with Java

Unified API
1

I’m using swagger-codegen-maven-plugin 2.4.5 under Java 8 to build a client library. Whilst it generates classes fine, making an API call to /Line/Mode/{mode}/Status fails, because the autogenerated code is calling /Line/Mode/%5Btube,%20dlr%5D/Status?detail=true, rather than /Line/Model/tube,dlr/Status?detail=true. The lineStatusByMode method call in LineApi requires a List of Strings (and I’m passing an ArrayList) and a Boolean, and it looks like it’s simply doing .toString() on the List.

Can anyone help? Whilst I could hack around this by editing autogenerated code, I’d rather not!

2

Does this help? You seem to have got some square brackets encoded, rather than just the single word tube

3

That’s the effect of calling .toString() on a List in Java - “[foo, bar]” rather than what I think swagger-codegen expects - and what the Unified API wants, which is “foo,bar”.

Ruby does similar:

2.5.1 :001 > a = ['foo', 'bar']
 => ["foo", "bar"] 
2.5.1 :002 > a
 => ["foo", "bar"] 
2.5.1 :003 > a.to_s
 => "[\"foo\", \"bar\"]"

I’m going to try generating the same code in different languages to see if it’s a Java-specific issue or not.

4

Why can’t you just use a fixed string to call for all the modes? It’s not like it returning that much data.

5

The autogenerated method requires a List, and won’t let me supply a String. If I dispense with the autogenerated code, I have another problem of deserializing the returned objects in to domain objects.

As far as I’m aware, the “$type” key in the returned JSON is a Microsoft-specific thing, and I don’t want to get wrapped up in writing my own deserialization code

6

Yes, you can just ignore the “$type” elements, they are not necessary.

The online docs I can see do this kind of thing

JSONParser parser = new JSONParser();
Reader reader = new FileReader("data.json");
Object jsonObj = parser.parse(reader);
JSONObject jsonObject = (JSONObject) jsonObj;

to take some JSON input and tranlsate it to an JSONObject that you can then itterate through?