4 ms·

> I tried with haskell and gave up when I noticed I couldn't easily get json serialization to be in the same order as the javascript implementation and therefor

> I tried with haskell and gave up when I noticed I couldn't easily get json serialization to be in the same order as the javascript implementation and therefor couldn't verify nor sign messages with interoperability with the current clients. This gets you most of the way there: > With the Aeson library, the order of keys in objects is undefined due to objects being implemented as HashMaps. To allow user-specified key orders in the pretty-printed JSON, encodePretty' can be configured with a comparison function. - https://hackage.haskell.org/package/aeson-pretty-0.8.7/docs/Data-Aeson-Encode-Pretty.html#g:3 https://hackage.haskell.org/package/aeson-pretty-0.8.7/docs/... I'm not sure that messes with spacing or not though or you require specific space preserving requirements to interoperate with current clients. Even if not you can probably look at the source of encodePretty' and work out how to not mess with spacing or keep it all on one line. I've wanted a version of Aeson for a while that preserves order and all formatting for things like linters that are very unobtrusive. It seems your use case would have benefitted from that as well.

fabianhjr 6y ago
Well, the problem is replicating the javascript order which isn't lexicographical. :/
- codygman 6y ago
  This gives you the ability to arbitrarily order via user defined list (the first argument) and then to order by some comparison function if for instance a new key were added (length in this example). Given the example: { "baz": ..., "bar": ..., "foo": ..., "quux": ..., } Then listing all of the keys in your desired order: comp :: Text -> Text -> Ordering comp = keyOrder ["foo","bar","baz","qux"] `mappend` comparing length Note if you list all keys in the first argument of keyOrder it never goes to comparing length. There is probably a cleaner way to denote that this is the case but I can't be bothered to figure it out atm. You can use this function: encodePretty' defConfig { confCompare = comp } YourType And it will produce: { "foo": ..., "bar": ..., "baz": ..., "quux": ..., } Can you give a sample of the javascript in the order necessary? This is from NPM? They have to use some comparison function to figure out how to sort their keys I'd imagine, so you could just copy that with Haskell.

fabianhjr 6y ago

Well, the problem is replicating the javascript order which isn't lexicographical. :/

codygman 6y ago
This gives you the ability to arbitrarily order via user defined list (the first argument) and then to order by some comparison function if for instance a new key were added (length in this example). Given the example: { "baz": ..., "bar": ..., "foo": ..., "quux": ..., } Then listing all of the keys in your desired order: comp :: Text -> Text -> Ordering comp = keyOrder ["foo","bar","baz","qux"] `mappend` comparing length Note if you list all keys in the first argument of keyOrder it never goes to comparing length. There is probably a cleaner way to denote that this is the case but I can't be bothered to figure it out atm. You can use this function: encodePretty' defConfig { confCompare = comp } YourType And it will produce: { "foo": ..., "bar": ..., "baz": ..., "quux": ..., } Can you give a sample of the javascript in the order necessary? This is from NPM? They have to use some comparison function to figure out how to sort their keys I'd imagine, so you could just copy that with Haskell.