I threw some code together to flatten and un-flatten complex/nested JSON objects. It works, but it's a bit slow (triggers the 'long script' warning).
For the flattened names I want "." as the delimiter and [INDEX] for arrays.
Examples:
un-flattened | flattened
---------------------------
{foo:{bar:false}} => {"foo.bar":false}
{a:[{b:["c","d"]}]} => {"a[0].b[0]":"c","a[0].b[1]":"d"}
[1,[2,[3,4],5],6] => {"[0]":1,"[1].[0]":2,"[1].[1].[0]":3,"[1].[1].[1]":4,"[1].[2]":5,"[2]":6}
I created a benchmark that ~simulates my use case http://jsfiddle.net/WSzec/
- Get a nested JSON object
- Flatten it
- Look through it and possibly modify it while flattened
- Unflatten it back to it's original nested format to be shipped away
I would like faster code: For clarification, code that completes the JSFiddle benchmark (http://jsfiddle.net/WSzec/) significantly faster (~20%+ would be nice) in IE 9+, FF 24+, and Chrome 29+.
Here's the relevant JavaScript code: Current Fastest: http://jsfiddle.net/WSzec/6/
JSON.unflatten = function(data) {
"use strict";
if (Object(data) !== data || Array.isArray(data))
return data;
var result = {}, cur, prop, idx, last, temp;
for(var p in data) {
cur = result, prop = "", last = 0;
do {
idx = p.indexOf(".", last);
temp = p.substring(last, idx !== -1 ? idx : undefined);
cur = cur[prop] || (cur[prop] = (!isNaN(parseInt(temp)) ? [] : {}));
prop = temp;
last = idx + 1;
} while(idx >= 0);
cur[prop] = data[p];
}
return result[""];
}
JSON.flatten = function(data) {
var result = {};
function recurse (cur, prop) {
if (Object(cur) !== cur) {
result[prop] = cur;
} else if (Array.isArray(cur)) {
for(var i=0, l=cur.length; i<l; i++)
recurse(cur[i], prop ? prop+"."+i : ""+i);
if (l == 0)
result[prop] = [];
} else {
var isEmpty = true;
for (var p in cur) {
isEmpty = false;
recurse(cur[p], prop ? prop+"."+p : p);
}
if (isEmpty)
result[prop] = {};
}
}
recurse(data, "");
return result;
}
EDIT 1 Modified the above to @Bergi 's implementation which is currently the fastest. As an aside, using ".indexOf" instead of "regex.exec" is around 20% faster in FF but 20% slower in Chrome; so I'll stick with the regex since it's simpler (here's my attempt at using indexOf to replace the regex http://jsfiddle.net/WSzec/2/).
EDIT 2 Building on @Bergi 's idea I managed to created a faster non-regex version (3x faster in FF and ~10% faster in Chrome). http://jsfiddle.net/WSzec/6/ In the this (the current) implementation the rules for key names are simply, keys cannot start with an integer or contain a period.
Example:
- {"foo":{"bar":[0]}} => {"foo.bar.0":0}
EDIT 3 Adding @AaditMShah 's inline path parsing approach (rather than String.split) helped to improve the unflatten performance. I'm very happy with the overall performance improvement reached.
The latest jsfiddle and jsperf:
3 ½ Years later...
For my own project I wanted to flatten JSON objects in mongoDB dot notation and came up with a simple solution:
Features and/or caveats
{a: () => {}}
you might not get what you wanted!{a: {}, b: []}
is flattened to{}
.I'd like to add a new version of flatten case (this is what i needed :)) which, according to my probes with the above jsFiddler, is slightly faster then the currently selected one. Moreover, me personally see this snippet a bit more readable, which is of course important for multi-developer projects.
ES6 version:
Example:
This code recursively flattens out JSON objects.
I included my timing mechanism in the code and it gives me 1ms but I'm not sure if that's the most accurate one.
Output:
Here's mine. It runs in <2ms in Google Apps Script on a sizable object. It uses dashes instead of dots for separators, and it doesn't handle arrays specially like in the asker's question, but this is what I wanted for my use.
Example:
Example output:
I wrote two functions to
flatten
andunflatten
a JSON object.Flatten a JSON object:
Performance:
Unflatten a JSON object:
Performance:
Flatten and unflatten a JSON object:
Overall my solution performs either equally well or even better than the current solution.
Performance:
Output format:
A flattened object uses the dot notation for object properties and the bracket notation for array indices:
{foo:{bar:false}} => {"foo.bar":false}
{a:[{b:["c","d"]}]} => {"a[0].b[0]":"c","a[0].b[1]":"d"}
[1,[2,[3,4],5],6] => {"[0]":1,"[1][0]":2,"[1][1][0]":3,"[1][1][1]":4,"[1][2]":5,"[2]":6}
In my opinion this format is better than only using the dot notation:
{foo:{bar:false}} => {"foo.bar":false}
{a:[{b:["c","d"]}]} => {"a.0.b.0":"c","a.0.b.1":"d"}
[1,[2,[3,4],5],6] => {"0":1,"1.0":2,"1.1.0":3,"1.1.1":4,"1.2":5,"2":6}
Advantages:
Disadvantages:
The current JSFiddle demo gave the following values as output:
My updated JSFiddle demo gave the following values as output:
I'm not really sure what that means, so I'll stick with the jsPerf results. After all jsPerf is a performance benchmarking utility. JSFiddle is not.