With JSONDecoder in Swift 4, can missing keys use a default value instead of having to be optional properties?

Question

Swift 4 added the new Codable protocol. When I use JSONDecoder it seems to require all the non-optional properties of my Codable class to have keys in the JSON or it throws an error.

Making every property of my class optional seems like an unnecessary hassle since what I really want is to use the value in the json or a default value. (I don't want the property to be nil.)

Is there a way to do this?

class MyCodable: Codable {
    var name: String = "Default Appleseed"
}

func load(input: String) {
    do {
        if let data = input.data(using: .utf8) {
            let result = try JSONDecoder().decode(MyCodable.self, from: data)
            print("name: \(result.name)")
        }
    } catch  {
        print("error: \(error)")
        // `Error message: "Key not found when expecting non-optional type
        // String for coding key \"name\""`
    }
}

let goodInput = "{\"name\": \"Jonny Appleseed\" }"
let badInput = "{}"
load(input: goodInput) // works, `name` is Jonny Applessed
load(input: badInput) // breaks, `name` required since property is non-optional

Answer 1

I wanted the default value if a key is not present in the API response, so I implemented the following solution. Hope it helps.

class MyModel: Codable {
    
    let id: String? = "1122"
    let name: String? = "Syed Faizan Ahmed"
    
    enum CodingKeys: String, CodingKey {
        case id = "id"
        case name = "name"
    }
    
    required init(from decoder: Decoder) throws {
        let values = try decoder.container(keyedBy: CodingKeys.self)
        id = try values.decodeIfPresent(String.self, forKey: .id) ?? id
        name = try values.decodeIfPresent(String.self, forKey: .name) ?? name
    }
}

Answer 2

You can use a computed property that defaults to the desired value if the JSON key is not found.

class MyCodable: Decodable {
    var name: String { return _name ?? "Default Appleseed" }
    var age: Int?

    // this is the property that gets actually decoded/encoded
    private var _name: String?

    enum CodingKeys: String, CodingKey {
        case _name = "name"
        case age
    }
}

If you want to have the property read-write, you can also implement the setter:

var name: String {
    get { _name ?? "Default Appleseed" }
    set { _name = newValue }
}

This adds a little extra verbosity as you'll need to declare another property, and will require adding the CodingKeys enum (if not already there). The advantage is that you don't need to write custom decoding/encoding code, which can become tedious at some point.

Note that this solution only works if the value for the JSON key either holds a string or is not present. If the JSON might have the value under another form (e.g. it's an int), then you can try this solution.

Answer 3

I came across this question looking for the exact same thing. The answers I found were not very satisfying even though I was afraid that the solutions here would be the only option.

In my case, creating a custom decoder would require a ton of boilerplate that would be hard to maintain so I kept searching for other answers.

I ran into this article that shows an interesting way to overcome this in simple cases using a @propertyWrapper. The most important thing for me, was that it was reusable and required minimal refactoring of existing code.

The article assumes a case where you'd want a missing boolean property to default to false without failing but also shows other different variants. You can read it in more detail but I'll show what I did for my use case.

In my case, I had an array that I wanted to be initialized as empty if the key was missing.

So, I declared the following @propertyWrapper and additional extensions:

@propertyWrapper
struct DefaultEmptyArray<T:Codable> {
    var wrappedValue: [T] = []
}

//codable extension to encode/decode the wrapped value
extension DefaultEmptyArray: Codable {
    
    func encode(to encoder: Encoder) throws {
        try wrappedValue.encode(to: encoder)
    }
    
    init(from decoder: Decoder) throws {
        let container = try decoder.singleValueContainer()
        wrappedValue = try container.decode([T].self)
    }
    
}

extension KeyedDecodingContainer {
    func decode<T:Decodable>(_ type: DefaultEmptyArray<T>.Type,
                forKey key: Key) throws -> DefaultEmptyArray<T> {
        try decodeIfPresent(type, forKey: key) ?? .init()
    }
}

The advantage of this method is that you can easily overcome the issue in existing code by simply adding the @propertyWrapper to the property. In my case:

@DefaultEmptyArray var items: [String] = []

Hope this helps someone dealing with the same issue.

---

UPDATE:

After posting this answer while continuing to look into the matter I found this other article but most importantly the respective library that contains some common easy to use @propertyWrappers for these kind of cases:

https://github.com/marksands/BetterCodable

Answer 4

Approach that I prefer is using so called DTOs - data transfer object. It is a struct, that conforms to Codable and represents the desired object.

struct MyClassDTO: Codable {
    let items: [String]?
    let otherVar: Int?
}

Then you simply init the object that you want to use in the app with that DTO.

 class MyClass {
    let items: [String]
    var otherVar = 3
    init(_ dto: MyClassDTO) {
        items = dto.items ?? [String]()
        otherVar = dto.otherVar ?? 3
    }

    var dto: MyClassDTO {
        return MyClassDTO(items: items, otherVar: otherVar)
    }
}

This approach is also good since you can rename and change final object however you wish to. It is clear and requires less code than manual decoding. Moreover, with this approach you can separate networking layer from other app.

Answer 5

You can implement.

struct Source : Codable {

    let id : String?
    let name : String?

    enum CodingKeys: String, CodingKey {
        case id = "id"
        case name = "name"
    }

    init(from decoder: Decoder) throws {
        let values = try decoder.container(keyedBy: CodingKeys.self)
        id = try values.decodeIfPresent(String.self, forKey: .id) ?? ""
        name = try values.decodeIfPresent(String.self, forKey: .name)
    }
}

Answer 6

If you don't want to implement your encoding and decoding methods, there is somewhat dirty solution around default values.

You can declare your new field as implicitly unwrapped optional and check if it's nil after decoding and set a default value.

I tested this only with PropertyListEncoder, but I think JSONDecoder works the same way.

Answer 7

If you think that writing your own version of init(from decoder: Decoder) is overwhelming, I would advice you to implement a method which will check the input before sending it to decoder. That way you'll have a place where you can check for fields absence and set your own default values.

For example:

final class CodableModel: Codable
{
    static func customDecode(_ obj: [String: Any]) -> CodableModel?
    {
        var validatedDict = obj
        let someField = validatedDict[CodingKeys.someField.stringValue] ?? false
        validatedDict[CodingKeys.someField.stringValue] = someField

        guard
            let data = try? JSONSerialization.data(withJSONObject: validatedDict, options: .prettyPrinted),
            let model = try? CodableModel.decoder.decode(CodableModel.self, from: data) else {
                return nil
        }

        return model
    }

    //your coding keys, properties, etc.
}

And in order to init an object from json, instead of:

do {
    let data = try JSONSerialization.data(withJSONObject: json, options: .prettyPrinted)
    let model = try CodableModel.decoder.decode(CodableModel.self, from: data)                        
} catch {
    assertionFailure(error.localizedDescription)
}

Init will look like this:

if let vuvVideoFile = PublicVideoFile.customDecode($0) {
    videos.append(vuvVideoFile)
}

In this particular situation I prefer to deal with optionals but if you have a different opinion, you can make your customDecode(:) method throwable

Answer 8

You can implement the init(from decoder: Decoder) method in your type instead of using the default implementation:

class MyCodable: Codable {
    var name: String = "Default Appleseed"

    required init(from decoder: Decoder) throws {
        let container = try decoder.container(keyedBy: CodingKeys.self)
        if let name = try container.decodeIfPresent(String.self, forKey: .name) {
            self.name = name
        }
    }
}

You can also make name a constant property (if you want to):

class MyCodable: Codable {
    let name: String

    required init(from decoder: Decoder) throws {
        let container = try decoder.container(keyedBy: CodingKeys.self)
        if let name = try container.decodeIfPresent(String.self, forKey: .name) {
            self.name = name
        } else {
            self.name = "Default Appleseed"
        }
    }
}

or

required init(from decoder: Decoder) throws {
    let container = try decoder.container(keyedBy: CodingKeys.self)
    self.name = try container.decodeIfPresent(String.self, forKey: .name) ?? "Default Appleseed"
}

Re your comment: With a custom extension

extension KeyedDecodingContainer {
    func decodeWrapper<T>(key: K, defaultValue: T) throws -> T
        where T : Decodable {
        return try decodeIfPresent(T.self, forKey: key) ?? defaultValue
    }
}

you could implement the init method as

required init(from decoder: Decoder) throws {
    let container = try decoder.container(keyedBy: CodingKeys.self)
    self.name = try container.decodeWrapper(key: .name, defaultValue: "Default Appleseed")
}

but that is not much shorter than

    self.name = try container.decodeIfPresent(String.self, forKey: .name) ?? "Default Appleseed"