This causes previously failing strings like "123-456" to return a valid json_object with the appropriate value. If you care about the trailing content, call json_tokener_parse_ex() and check the parse end point with json_tokener_get_parse_end().
* Fix incremental parsing of numbers, especially those with exponents, e.g.
so parsing "[0", "e+", "-]" now properly returns an error.
Strict mode now rejects missing exponents ("0e").
+* Successfully return number objects at the top level even when they are
+ followed by a "-", "." or "e". This makes parsing things like "123-45"
+ behave consistently with things like "123xyz".
***
// Don't define this. It's not thread-safe.
/* #define REFCOUNT_DEBUG 1 */
-const char *json_number_chars = "0123456789.+-eE";
const char *json_hex_chars = "0123456789abcdefABCDEF";
static void json_object_generic_delete(struct json_object *jso);
void _json_c_set_last_err(const char *err_fmt, ...);
-extern const char *json_number_chars;
extern const char *json_hex_chars;
#ifdef __cplusplus
return NULL;
obj = json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, str, -1);
*error = tok->err;
- if (tok->err != json_tokener_success)
+ if (tok->err != json_tokener_success
+#if 0
+ /* This would be a more sensible default, and cause parsing
+ * things like "null123" to fail when the caller can't know
+ * where the parsing left off, but starting to fail would
+ * be a notable behaviour change. Save for a 1.0 release.
+ */
+ || json_tokener_get_parse_end(tok) != strlen(str)
+#endif
+ )
+
{
if (obj != NULL)
json_object_put(obj);
const char *case_start = str;
int case_len = 0;
int is_exponent = 0;
- int negativesign_next_possible_location = 1;
+ int neg_sign_ok = 1;
+ int pos_sign_ok = 0;
if (printbuf_length(tok->pb) > 0)
{
/* We don't save all state from the previous incremental parse
char *last_saved_char =
&tok->pb->buf[printbuf_length(tok->pb) - 1];
is_exponent = 1;
+ pos_sign_ok = neg_sign_ok = 1;
/* If the "e" isn't at the end, we can't start with a '-' */
if (e_loc != last_saved_char)
- negativesign_next_possible_location = -1;
+ {
+ neg_sign_ok = 0;
+ pos_sign_ok = 0;
+ }
// else leave it set to 1, i.e. start of the new input
}
}
- while (c && strchr(json_number_chars, c))
+
+ while (c &&
+ ((c >= '0' && c <= '9') ||
+ (!is_exponent && (c=='e' || c=='E')) ||
+ (neg_sign_ok && c=='-') ||
+ (pos_sign_ok && c=='+') ||
+ (!tok->is_double && c=='.')
+ ))
{
+ pos_sign_ok = neg_sign_ok = 0;
++case_len;
/* non-digit characters checks */
switch (c)
{
case '.':
- if (tok->is_double != 0)
- {
- /* '.' can only be found once, and out of the exponent part.
- * Thus, if the input is already flagged as double, it
- * is invalid.
- */
- tok->err = json_tokener_error_parse_number;
- goto out;
- }
tok->is_double = 1;
+ pos_sign_ok = 1;
+ neg_sign_ok = 1;
break;
case 'e': /* FALLTHRU */
case 'E':
- if (is_exponent != 0)
- {
- /* only one exponent possible */
- tok->err = json_tokener_error_parse_number;
- goto out;
- }
is_exponent = 1;
tok->is_double = 1;
/* the exponent part can begin with a negative sign */
- negativesign_next_possible_location = case_len + 1;
- break;
- case '-':
- if (case_len != negativesign_next_possible_location)
- {
- /* If the negative sign is not where expected (ie
- * start of input or start of exponent part), the
- * input is invalid.
- */
- tok->err = json_tokener_error_parse_number;
- goto out;
- }
+ pos_sign_ok = neg_sign_ok = 1;
break;
default: break;
}
goto out;
}
}
+ /*
+ Now we know c isn't a valid number char, but check whether
+ it might have been intended to be, and return a potentially
+ more understandable error right away.
+ However, if we're at the top-level, use the number as-is
+ because c can be part of a new object to parse on the
+ next call to json_tokener_parse().
+ */
+ if (tok->depth > 0 &&
+ c != ',' && c != ']' && c != '}' && c != '/' &&
+ c != 'I' && c != 'i' &&
+ !isspace((unsigned char)c))
+ {
+ tok->err = json_tokener_error_parse_number;
+ goto out;
+ }
if (case_len > 0)
printbuf_memappend_fast(tok->pb, case_start, case_len);
single_basic_parse("12", 0);
single_basic_parse("12.3", 0);
- single_basic_parse("12.3.4", 0); /* non-sensical, returns null */
- /* was returning (int)2015 before patch, should return null */
- single_basic_parse("2015-01-15", 0);
- /* ...but this works. It's rather inconsistent, and a future major release
- * should change the behavior so it either always returns null when extra
- * bytes are present (preferred), or always return object created from as much
- * as was able to be parsed.
+ /* Even though, when using json_tokener_parse() there's no way to
+ * know when there is more data after the parsed object,
+ * an object is successfully returned anyway (in some cases)
*/
+
+ single_basic_parse("12.3.4", 0);
+ single_basic_parse("2015-01-15", 0);
single_basic_parse("12.3xxx", 0);
+ single_basic_parse("12.3{\"a\":123}", 0);
+ single_basic_parse("12.3\n", 0);
+ single_basic_parse("12.3 ", 0);
single_basic_parse("{\"FoO\" : -12.3E512}", 0);
single_basic_parse("{\"FoO\" : -12.3e512}", 0);
{"[0e-]", -1, -1, json_tokener_success, 1},
{"[0e-]", -1, 4, json_tokener_error_parse_number, 1, JSON_TOKENER_STRICT},
- {"0e+-", 5, 3, json_tokener_error_parse_number, 1},
+ /* You might expect this to fail, but it won't because
+ it's a valid partial parse; note the char_offset: */
+ {"0e+-", 5, 3, json_tokener_success, 1},
+ {"0e+-", 5, 3, json_tokener_error_parse_number, 1, JSON_TOKENER_STRICT},
{"[0e+-]", -1, 4, json_tokener_error_parse_number, 1},
/* Similar tests for other kinds of objects: */
{"{\"a\":1}{\"b\":2}", 15, 7, json_tokener_success, 0},
{&"{\"a\":1}{\"b\":2}"[7], 8, 7, json_tokener_success, 1},
- /* Some bad formatting. Check we get the correct error status
- * XXX this means we can't have two numbers in the incremental parse
- * XXX stream with the second one being a negative number!
- */
- {"2015-01-15", 10, 4, json_tokener_error_parse_number, 1},
+ /*
+ * Though this may seem invalid at first glance, it
+ * parses as three separate numbers, 2015, -1 and -15
+ * Of course, simply pasting together a stream of arbitrary
+ * positive numbers won't work, since there'll be no way to
+ * tell where in e.g. "2015015" the next number stats, so
+ * a reliably parsable stream must not include json_type_int
+ * or json_type_double objects without some other delimiter.
+ * e.g. whitespace
+ */
+ {&"2015-01-15"[0], 11, 4, json_tokener_success, 1},
+ {&"2015-01-15"[4], 7, 3, json_tokener_success, 1},
+ {&"2015-01-15"[7], 4, 3, json_tokener_success, 1},
+ {&"2015 01 15"[0], 11, 5, json_tokener_success, 1},
+ {&"2015 01 15"[4], 7, 4, json_tokener_success, 1},
+ {&"2015 01 15"[7], 4, 3, json_tokener_success, 1},
/* Strings have a well defined end point, so we can stop at the quote */
{"\"blue\"", -1, -1, json_tokener_success, 0},
new_obj.to_string(iNfinity)=Infinity
new_obj.to_string(12)=12
new_obj.to_string(12.3)=12.3
-new_obj.to_string(12.3.4)=null
-new_obj.to_string(2015-01-15)=null
+new_obj.to_string(12.3.4)=12.3
+new_obj.to_string(2015-01-15)=2015
new_obj.to_string(12.3xxx)=12.3
+new_obj.to_string(12.3{"a":123})=12.3
+new_obj.to_string(12.3
+)=12.3
+new_obj.to_string(12.3 )=12.3
new_obj.to_string({"FoO" : -12.3E512})={ "FoO": -12.3E512 }
new_obj.to_string({"FoO" : -12.3e512})={ "FoO": -12.3e512 }
new_obj.to_string({"FoO" : -12.3E51.2})=null
json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, 0e- , 4) ... OK: got correct error: unexpected end of data
json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, [0e-] , 5) ... OK: got object of type [array]: [ 0 ]
json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, [0e-] , 5) ... OK: got correct error: number expected
+json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, 0e+- , 5) ... OK: got object of type [double]: 0
json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, 0e+- , 5) ... OK: got correct error: number expected
json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, [0e+-] , 6) ... OK: got correct error: number expected
json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, false , 5) ... OK: got correct error: continue
json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, x , 2) ... OK: got correct error: unexpected character
json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, {"a":1}{"b":2}, 15) ... OK: got object of type [object]: { "a": 1 }
json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, {"b":2} , 8) ... OK: got object of type [object]: { "b": 2 }
-json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, 2015-01-15 , 10) ... OK: got correct error: number expected
+json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, 2015-01-15 , 11) ... OK: got object of type [int]: 2015
+json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, -01-15 , 7) ... OK: got object of type [int]: -1
+json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, -15 , 4) ... OK: got object of type [int]: -15
+json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, 2015 01 15 , 11) ... OK: got object of type [int]: 2015
+json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, 01 15 , 7) ... OK: got object of type [int]: 1
+json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, 15 , 4) ... OK: got object of type [int]: 15
json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, "blue" , 6) ... OK: got object of type [string]: "blue"
json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, "\"" , 4) ... OK: got object of type [string]: "\""
json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, "\\" , 4) ... OK: got object of type [string]: "\\"
json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, "\ud0031À" , 10) ... OK: got correct error: invalid utf-8 string
json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, 11\8111 , 5) ... OK: got correct error: invalid utf-8 string
json_tokener_parse_ex(tok, {"1\81":1} , 8) ... OK: got correct error: invalid utf-8 string
-End Incremental Tests OK=179 ERROR=0
+End Incremental Tests OK=185 ERROR=0
==================================
projects / thirdparty / json-c.git / commitdiff
