Map in AuraEnabled now failing in Spring 19 with “Value provided is invalid for action parameter”
Seems Spring 19 wants stricter typing for aura attributes, but I'm not finding any best practices on how to approach this.
This use to work in Winter 19:
MainController.js
let myData = {
parentId: "123abc",
sourceData: [
{
childId: "1",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
},
{
childId: "2",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
}
]
}
helper.engineService(component).sendMyData(
myData
)
EngineService.cmp
<aura:method name="sendMyData" action="{! c.handleSendMyData }">
<aura:attribute name="data" type="Object"/>
</aura:method>
EngineServiceController.js
handleSendMyData : function(component, event, helper) {
var params = event.getParam("arguments");
var action = component.get("c.goGetMyData");
action.setStorable();
action.setParams({
data : params.data
});
helper.dispatchAction(component, action, params); //enqueues action
},
Server
@AuraEnabled
public static Map<String, Object> goGetMyData(Map<String, Object> data) {
// In Spring 19, we don't even see this next line
System.debug('appendEngineCache data: '+data);
// winter 19 use to parse these correctly
Id recordId = (Id)data.get('parentId');
List<Children__c> someChildren = (List<Children__c>)data.get('sourceData');
// more
}
In Spring 19, I'm not seeing any serverside debugs other than enter and immediately exit Aura with this client-side error:
"Value provided is invalid for action parameter 'data' of type 'Map'"
Here's what I've tried so far with no success:
- change aura attribute type
Object
toMap
(with and w/odefault="{}"
). - change serverside argument from
Map<String, Object>
toObject
and it gacks
Here's what works, but not ideal (so I'm looking for alternatives)
- Use
JSON.stringify(data)
and changing apex argument toString
then useMap<String, Object> parsedData = (Map<String, Object>)JSON.deserializedUntyped(data)
inside the method. - Then, continue to use
parsedData
in any downstream Apex.
Anyone found any alternatives without that additional type coercion overhead?
EDIT: Possible solution until more info?
Given that existing unit / integration tests sometimes need to call these methods (with Map<String, Object> parameters
), this is the least path of resistance I've found is to overload existing method AND use JSON.stringify
at some point in clientside.
Client
action.setParams({
data : JSON.stringify(params.data)
});
Server
@AuraEnabled
public static Map<String, Object> goGetMyData(String data) {
return goGetMyData((Map<String, Object>)JSON.deserializeUntyped(data));
}
@TestVisible
private static Map<String, Object> goGetMyData(Map<String, Object> data) {
// all existing code
// but @TestVisible added and switched over to private so aura component doesn't find the wrong one.
}
apex lightning-aura-components lightning
add a comment |
Seems Spring 19 wants stricter typing for aura attributes, but I'm not finding any best practices on how to approach this.
This use to work in Winter 19:
MainController.js
let myData = {
parentId: "123abc",
sourceData: [
{
childId: "1",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
},
{
childId: "2",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
}
]
}
helper.engineService(component).sendMyData(
myData
)
EngineService.cmp
<aura:method name="sendMyData" action="{! c.handleSendMyData }">
<aura:attribute name="data" type="Object"/>
</aura:method>
EngineServiceController.js
handleSendMyData : function(component, event, helper) {
var params = event.getParam("arguments");
var action = component.get("c.goGetMyData");
action.setStorable();
action.setParams({
data : params.data
});
helper.dispatchAction(component, action, params); //enqueues action
},
Server
@AuraEnabled
public static Map<String, Object> goGetMyData(Map<String, Object> data) {
// In Spring 19, we don't even see this next line
System.debug('appendEngineCache data: '+data);
// winter 19 use to parse these correctly
Id recordId = (Id)data.get('parentId');
List<Children__c> someChildren = (List<Children__c>)data.get('sourceData');
// more
}
In Spring 19, I'm not seeing any serverside debugs other than enter and immediately exit Aura with this client-side error:
"Value provided is invalid for action parameter 'data' of type 'Map'"
Here's what I've tried so far with no success:
- change aura attribute type
Object
toMap
(with and w/odefault="{}"
). - change serverside argument from
Map<String, Object>
toObject
and it gacks
Here's what works, but not ideal (so I'm looking for alternatives)
- Use
JSON.stringify(data)
and changing apex argument toString
then useMap<String, Object> parsedData = (Map<String, Object>)JSON.deserializedUntyped(data)
inside the method. - Then, continue to use
parsedData
in any downstream Apex.
Anyone found any alternatives without that additional type coercion overhead?
EDIT: Possible solution until more info?
Given that existing unit / integration tests sometimes need to call these methods (with Map<String, Object> parameters
), this is the least path of resistance I've found is to overload existing method AND use JSON.stringify
at some point in clientside.
Client
action.setParams({
data : JSON.stringify(params.data)
});
Server
@AuraEnabled
public static Map<String, Object> goGetMyData(String data) {
return goGetMyData((Map<String, Object>)JSON.deserializeUntyped(data));
}
@TestVisible
private static Map<String, Object> goGetMyData(Map<String, Object> data) {
// all existing code
// but @TestVisible added and switched over to private so aura component doesn't find the wrong one.
}
apex lightning-aura-components lightning
I have a tweet to Kris grey from Salesforce and he said he has someone looking onto it.
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
2
twitter.com/msrivastav13/status/1082345858375565314
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
@MohithShrivastava thanks!
– tsalb
yesterday
add a comment |
Seems Spring 19 wants stricter typing for aura attributes, but I'm not finding any best practices on how to approach this.
This use to work in Winter 19:
MainController.js
let myData = {
parentId: "123abc",
sourceData: [
{
childId: "1",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
},
{
childId: "2",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
}
]
}
helper.engineService(component).sendMyData(
myData
)
EngineService.cmp
<aura:method name="sendMyData" action="{! c.handleSendMyData }">
<aura:attribute name="data" type="Object"/>
</aura:method>
EngineServiceController.js
handleSendMyData : function(component, event, helper) {
var params = event.getParam("arguments");
var action = component.get("c.goGetMyData");
action.setStorable();
action.setParams({
data : params.data
});
helper.dispatchAction(component, action, params); //enqueues action
},
Server
@AuraEnabled
public static Map<String, Object> goGetMyData(Map<String, Object> data) {
// In Spring 19, we don't even see this next line
System.debug('appendEngineCache data: '+data);
// winter 19 use to parse these correctly
Id recordId = (Id)data.get('parentId');
List<Children__c> someChildren = (List<Children__c>)data.get('sourceData');
// more
}
In Spring 19, I'm not seeing any serverside debugs other than enter and immediately exit Aura with this client-side error:
"Value provided is invalid for action parameter 'data' of type 'Map'"
Here's what I've tried so far with no success:
- change aura attribute type
Object
toMap
(with and w/odefault="{}"
). - change serverside argument from
Map<String, Object>
toObject
and it gacks
Here's what works, but not ideal (so I'm looking for alternatives)
- Use
JSON.stringify(data)
and changing apex argument toString
then useMap<String, Object> parsedData = (Map<String, Object>)JSON.deserializedUntyped(data)
inside the method. - Then, continue to use
parsedData
in any downstream Apex.
Anyone found any alternatives without that additional type coercion overhead?
EDIT: Possible solution until more info?
Given that existing unit / integration tests sometimes need to call these methods (with Map<String, Object> parameters
), this is the least path of resistance I've found is to overload existing method AND use JSON.stringify
at some point in clientside.
Client
action.setParams({
data : JSON.stringify(params.data)
});
Server
@AuraEnabled
public static Map<String, Object> goGetMyData(String data) {
return goGetMyData((Map<String, Object>)JSON.deserializeUntyped(data));
}
@TestVisible
private static Map<String, Object> goGetMyData(Map<String, Object> data) {
// all existing code
// but @TestVisible added and switched over to private so aura component doesn't find the wrong one.
}
apex lightning-aura-components lightning
Seems Spring 19 wants stricter typing for aura attributes, but I'm not finding any best practices on how to approach this.
This use to work in Winter 19:
MainController.js
let myData = {
parentId: "123abc",
sourceData: [
{
childId: "1",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
},
{
childId: "2",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
}
]
}
helper.engineService(component).sendMyData(
myData
)
EngineService.cmp
<aura:method name="sendMyData" action="{! c.handleSendMyData }">
<aura:attribute name="data" type="Object"/>
</aura:method>
EngineServiceController.js
handleSendMyData : function(component, event, helper) {
var params = event.getParam("arguments");
var action = component.get("c.goGetMyData");
action.setStorable();
action.setParams({
data : params.data
});
helper.dispatchAction(component, action, params); //enqueues action
},
Server
@AuraEnabled
public static Map<String, Object> goGetMyData(Map<String, Object> data) {
// In Spring 19, we don't even see this next line
System.debug('appendEngineCache data: '+data);
// winter 19 use to parse these correctly
Id recordId = (Id)data.get('parentId');
List<Children__c> someChildren = (List<Children__c>)data.get('sourceData');
// more
}
In Spring 19, I'm not seeing any serverside debugs other than enter and immediately exit Aura with this client-side error:
"Value provided is invalid for action parameter 'data' of type 'Map'"
Here's what I've tried so far with no success:
- change aura attribute type
Object
toMap
(with and w/odefault="{}"
). - change serverside argument from
Map<String, Object>
toObject
and it gacks
Here's what works, but not ideal (so I'm looking for alternatives)
- Use
JSON.stringify(data)
and changing apex argument toString
then useMap<String, Object> parsedData = (Map<String, Object>)JSON.deserializedUntyped(data)
inside the method. - Then, continue to use
parsedData
in any downstream Apex.
Anyone found any alternatives without that additional type coercion overhead?
EDIT: Possible solution until more info?
Given that existing unit / integration tests sometimes need to call these methods (with Map<String, Object> parameters
), this is the least path of resistance I've found is to overload existing method AND use JSON.stringify
at some point in clientside.
Client
action.setParams({
data : JSON.stringify(params.data)
});
Server
@AuraEnabled
public static Map<String, Object> goGetMyData(String data) {
return goGetMyData((Map<String, Object>)JSON.deserializeUntyped(data));
}
@TestVisible
private static Map<String, Object> goGetMyData(Map<String, Object> data) {
// all existing code
// but @TestVisible added and switched over to private so aura component doesn't find the wrong one.
}
apex lightning-aura-components lightning
apex lightning-aura-components lightning
edited yesterday
tsalb
asked yesterday
tsalbtsalb
1,327913
1,327913
I have a tweet to Kris grey from Salesforce and he said he has someone looking onto it.
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
2
twitter.com/msrivastav13/status/1082345858375565314
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
@MohithShrivastava thanks!
– tsalb
yesterday
add a comment |
I have a tweet to Kris grey from Salesforce and he said he has someone looking onto it.
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
2
twitter.com/msrivastav13/status/1082345858375565314
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
@MohithShrivastava thanks!
– tsalb
yesterday
I have a tweet to Kris grey from Salesforce and he said he has someone looking onto it.
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
I have a tweet to Kris grey from Salesforce and he said he has someone looking onto it.
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
2
2
twitter.com/msrivastav13/status/1082345858375565314
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
twitter.com/msrivastav13/status/1082345858375565314
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
@MohithShrivastava thanks!
– tsalb
yesterday
@MohithShrivastava thanks!
– tsalb
yesterday
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Fix for this issue(W-5724071) is in the upcoming patch (scheduled to be released in mid Jan).
In Spring'19 salesforce is addressing various long standing issues with deserialization pertaining to apex actions. Brief list of enhancements include,
- Make conversion of all primitive apex data types work for positive use cases. There were a few reported issues here by the community (e.g. link).
- Make incorrect usage error out with a clear develop error. Currently any incorrect usage results in internal server error (resulting in noise for us and useless stack-id for developer)
- Add support POJO style user defined Apex types
- Make handing of SObjects consistent
- Add support for nested lists/maps
I have also reached out to documentation team to ensure more details of the enhancements get incorporated in the public docs.
1
An example of each of the use case will be handy .Also community can help you testing few of these .
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
1
Wonderful, would definitely be interested in how POJO is represented in Apex in the public docs as this was my intent behind leaving JSON off the table.
– tsalb
yesterday
add a comment |
If you don't want to use JSON serialization and deserialization downtrip, you can use Inner classes. Just make sure you have setter and getter in your Aura Enabled Attribute
So your Apex code will be:
public class MyApexClassController {
@AuraEnabled
public static ApexWrapper goGetMyData(ApexWrapper data) {
System.debug('appendEngineCache data: ' + JSON.serialize(data));
ApexWrapper ad= new ApexWrapper();
ad.parentId ='222';
return ad;
}
public class ApexWrapper{
@AuraEnabled
public String parentId {get;set;} //123abc
@AuraEnabled
public List<Map<String,Object>> sourceData{get;set;}
}
}
JS Code:
({
onButtonClick : function(component, event, helper) {
let myData = {
parentId: "123abc",
sourceData: [
{
childId: "1",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
},
{
childId: "2",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
}
]
}
let action = component.get("c.goGetMyData");
action.setParams({
data : myData
});
action.setCallback(this, function(response) {
var state = response.getState();
if (state === "SUCCESS") {
// Alert the user with the value returned
// from the server
alert("From server: " + response.getReturnValue());
console.log(JSON.stringify(response.getReturnValue()));
component.set("v.myData",response.getReturnValue());
// You would typically fire a event here to trigger
// client-side notification that the server-side
// action is complete
}
else if (state === "INCOMPLETE") {
// do something
}
else if (state === "ERROR") {
var errors = response.getError();
if (errors) {
if (errors[0] && errors[0].message) {
console.log("Error message: " +
errors[0].message);
}
} else {
console.log("Unknown error");
}
}
});
$A.enqueueAction(action);
}
})
This automatically serializes into proper Apex type and System.debug
gets printed
3
Yeah, this was the alternative - but this is actually even higher overhead as you're basically creating the handshake yourself (which is ridiculous imo)
– tsalb
yesterday
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "459"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsalesforce.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f245698%2fmapstring-object-in-auraenabled-now-failing-in-spring-19-with-value-provided%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Fix for this issue(W-5724071) is in the upcoming patch (scheduled to be released in mid Jan).
In Spring'19 salesforce is addressing various long standing issues with deserialization pertaining to apex actions. Brief list of enhancements include,
- Make conversion of all primitive apex data types work for positive use cases. There were a few reported issues here by the community (e.g. link).
- Make incorrect usage error out with a clear develop error. Currently any incorrect usage results in internal server error (resulting in noise for us and useless stack-id for developer)
- Add support POJO style user defined Apex types
- Make handing of SObjects consistent
- Add support for nested lists/maps
I have also reached out to documentation team to ensure more details of the enhancements get incorporated in the public docs.
1
An example of each of the use case will be handy .Also community can help you testing few of these .
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
1
Wonderful, would definitely be interested in how POJO is represented in Apex in the public docs as this was my intent behind leaving JSON off the table.
– tsalb
yesterday
add a comment |
Fix for this issue(W-5724071) is in the upcoming patch (scheduled to be released in mid Jan).
In Spring'19 salesforce is addressing various long standing issues with deserialization pertaining to apex actions. Brief list of enhancements include,
- Make conversion of all primitive apex data types work for positive use cases. There were a few reported issues here by the community (e.g. link).
- Make incorrect usage error out with a clear develop error. Currently any incorrect usage results in internal server error (resulting in noise for us and useless stack-id for developer)
- Add support POJO style user defined Apex types
- Make handing of SObjects consistent
- Add support for nested lists/maps
I have also reached out to documentation team to ensure more details of the enhancements get incorporated in the public docs.
1
An example of each of the use case will be handy .Also community can help you testing few of these .
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
1
Wonderful, would definitely be interested in how POJO is represented in Apex in the public docs as this was my intent behind leaving JSON off the table.
– tsalb
yesterday
add a comment |
Fix for this issue(W-5724071) is in the upcoming patch (scheduled to be released in mid Jan).
In Spring'19 salesforce is addressing various long standing issues with deserialization pertaining to apex actions. Brief list of enhancements include,
- Make conversion of all primitive apex data types work for positive use cases. There were a few reported issues here by the community (e.g. link).
- Make incorrect usage error out with a clear develop error. Currently any incorrect usage results in internal server error (resulting in noise for us and useless stack-id for developer)
- Add support POJO style user defined Apex types
- Make handing of SObjects consistent
- Add support for nested lists/maps
I have also reached out to documentation team to ensure more details of the enhancements get incorporated in the public docs.
Fix for this issue(W-5724071) is in the upcoming patch (scheduled to be released in mid Jan).
In Spring'19 salesforce is addressing various long standing issues with deserialization pertaining to apex actions. Brief list of enhancements include,
- Make conversion of all primitive apex data types work for positive use cases. There were a few reported issues here by the community (e.g. link).
- Make incorrect usage error out with a clear develop error. Currently any incorrect usage results in internal server error (resulting in noise for us and useless stack-id for developer)
- Add support POJO style user defined Apex types
- Make handing of SObjects consistent
- Add support for nested lists/maps
I have also reached out to documentation team to ensure more details of the enhancements get incorporated in the public docs.
answered yesterday
Emad SalmanEmad Salman
50922
50922
1
An example of each of the use case will be handy .Also community can help you testing few of these .
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
1
Wonderful, would definitely be interested in how POJO is represented in Apex in the public docs as this was my intent behind leaving JSON off the table.
– tsalb
yesterday
add a comment |
1
An example of each of the use case will be handy .Also community can help you testing few of these .
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
1
Wonderful, would definitely be interested in how POJO is represented in Apex in the public docs as this was my intent behind leaving JSON off the table.
– tsalb
yesterday
1
1
An example of each of the use case will be handy .Also community can help you testing few of these .
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
An example of each of the use case will be handy .Also community can help you testing few of these .
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
1
1
Wonderful, would definitely be interested in how POJO is represented in Apex in the public docs as this was my intent behind leaving JSON off the table.
– tsalb
yesterday
Wonderful, would definitely be interested in how POJO is represented in Apex in the public docs as this was my intent behind leaving JSON off the table.
– tsalb
yesterday
add a comment |
If you don't want to use JSON serialization and deserialization downtrip, you can use Inner classes. Just make sure you have setter and getter in your Aura Enabled Attribute
So your Apex code will be:
public class MyApexClassController {
@AuraEnabled
public static ApexWrapper goGetMyData(ApexWrapper data) {
System.debug('appendEngineCache data: ' + JSON.serialize(data));
ApexWrapper ad= new ApexWrapper();
ad.parentId ='222';
return ad;
}
public class ApexWrapper{
@AuraEnabled
public String parentId {get;set;} //123abc
@AuraEnabled
public List<Map<String,Object>> sourceData{get;set;}
}
}
JS Code:
({
onButtonClick : function(component, event, helper) {
let myData = {
parentId: "123abc",
sourceData: [
{
childId: "1",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
},
{
childId: "2",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
}
]
}
let action = component.get("c.goGetMyData");
action.setParams({
data : myData
});
action.setCallback(this, function(response) {
var state = response.getState();
if (state === "SUCCESS") {
// Alert the user with the value returned
// from the server
alert("From server: " + response.getReturnValue());
console.log(JSON.stringify(response.getReturnValue()));
component.set("v.myData",response.getReturnValue());
// You would typically fire a event here to trigger
// client-side notification that the server-side
// action is complete
}
else if (state === "INCOMPLETE") {
// do something
}
else if (state === "ERROR") {
var errors = response.getError();
if (errors) {
if (errors[0] && errors[0].message) {
console.log("Error message: " +
errors[0].message);
}
} else {
console.log("Unknown error");
}
}
});
$A.enqueueAction(action);
}
})
This automatically serializes into proper Apex type and System.debug
gets printed
3
Yeah, this was the alternative - but this is actually even higher overhead as you're basically creating the handshake yourself (which is ridiculous imo)
– tsalb
yesterday
add a comment |
If you don't want to use JSON serialization and deserialization downtrip, you can use Inner classes. Just make sure you have setter and getter in your Aura Enabled Attribute
So your Apex code will be:
public class MyApexClassController {
@AuraEnabled
public static ApexWrapper goGetMyData(ApexWrapper data) {
System.debug('appendEngineCache data: ' + JSON.serialize(data));
ApexWrapper ad= new ApexWrapper();
ad.parentId ='222';
return ad;
}
public class ApexWrapper{
@AuraEnabled
public String parentId {get;set;} //123abc
@AuraEnabled
public List<Map<String,Object>> sourceData{get;set;}
}
}
JS Code:
({
onButtonClick : function(component, event, helper) {
let myData = {
parentId: "123abc",
sourceData: [
{
childId: "1",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
},
{
childId: "2",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
}
]
}
let action = component.get("c.goGetMyData");
action.setParams({
data : myData
});
action.setCallback(this, function(response) {
var state = response.getState();
if (state === "SUCCESS") {
// Alert the user with the value returned
// from the server
alert("From server: " + response.getReturnValue());
console.log(JSON.stringify(response.getReturnValue()));
component.set("v.myData",response.getReturnValue());
// You would typically fire a event here to trigger
// client-side notification that the server-side
// action is complete
}
else if (state === "INCOMPLETE") {
// do something
}
else if (state === "ERROR") {
var errors = response.getError();
if (errors) {
if (errors[0] && errors[0].message) {
console.log("Error message: " +
errors[0].message);
}
} else {
console.log("Unknown error");
}
}
});
$A.enqueueAction(action);
}
})
This automatically serializes into proper Apex type and System.debug
gets printed
3
Yeah, this was the alternative - but this is actually even higher overhead as you're basically creating the handshake yourself (which is ridiculous imo)
– tsalb
yesterday
add a comment |
If you don't want to use JSON serialization and deserialization downtrip, you can use Inner classes. Just make sure you have setter and getter in your Aura Enabled Attribute
So your Apex code will be:
public class MyApexClassController {
@AuraEnabled
public static ApexWrapper goGetMyData(ApexWrapper data) {
System.debug('appendEngineCache data: ' + JSON.serialize(data));
ApexWrapper ad= new ApexWrapper();
ad.parentId ='222';
return ad;
}
public class ApexWrapper{
@AuraEnabled
public String parentId {get;set;} //123abc
@AuraEnabled
public List<Map<String,Object>> sourceData{get;set;}
}
}
JS Code:
({
onButtonClick : function(component, event, helper) {
let myData = {
parentId: "123abc",
sourceData: [
{
childId: "1",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
},
{
childId: "2",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
}
]
}
let action = component.get("c.goGetMyData");
action.setParams({
data : myData
});
action.setCallback(this, function(response) {
var state = response.getState();
if (state === "SUCCESS") {
// Alert the user with the value returned
// from the server
alert("From server: " + response.getReturnValue());
console.log(JSON.stringify(response.getReturnValue()));
component.set("v.myData",response.getReturnValue());
// You would typically fire a event here to trigger
// client-side notification that the server-side
// action is complete
}
else if (state === "INCOMPLETE") {
// do something
}
else if (state === "ERROR") {
var errors = response.getError();
if (errors) {
if (errors[0] && errors[0].message) {
console.log("Error message: " +
errors[0].message);
}
} else {
console.log("Unknown error");
}
}
});
$A.enqueueAction(action);
}
})
This automatically serializes into proper Apex type and System.debug
gets printed
If you don't want to use JSON serialization and deserialization downtrip, you can use Inner classes. Just make sure you have setter and getter in your Aura Enabled Attribute
So your Apex code will be:
public class MyApexClassController {
@AuraEnabled
public static ApexWrapper goGetMyData(ApexWrapper data) {
System.debug('appendEngineCache data: ' + JSON.serialize(data));
ApexWrapper ad= new ApexWrapper();
ad.parentId ='222';
return ad;
}
public class ApexWrapper{
@AuraEnabled
public String parentId {get;set;} //123abc
@AuraEnabled
public List<Map<String,Object>> sourceData{get;set;}
}
}
JS Code:
({
onButtonClick : function(component, event, helper) {
let myData = {
parentId: "123abc",
sourceData: [
{
childId: "1",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
},
{
childId: "2",
Some_Bool_Field__c: true
}
]
}
let action = component.get("c.goGetMyData");
action.setParams({
data : myData
});
action.setCallback(this, function(response) {
var state = response.getState();
if (state === "SUCCESS") {
// Alert the user with the value returned
// from the server
alert("From server: " + response.getReturnValue());
console.log(JSON.stringify(response.getReturnValue()));
component.set("v.myData",response.getReturnValue());
// You would typically fire a event here to trigger
// client-side notification that the server-side
// action is complete
}
else if (state === "INCOMPLETE") {
// do something
}
else if (state === "ERROR") {
var errors = response.getError();
if (errors) {
if (errors[0] && errors[0].message) {
console.log("Error message: " +
errors[0].message);
}
} else {
console.log("Unknown error");
}
}
});
$A.enqueueAction(action);
}
})
This automatically serializes into proper Apex type and System.debug
gets printed
answered yesterday
Pranay JaiswalPranay Jaiswal
13.8k32351
13.8k32351
3
Yeah, this was the alternative - but this is actually even higher overhead as you're basically creating the handshake yourself (which is ridiculous imo)
– tsalb
yesterday
add a comment |
3
Yeah, this was the alternative - but this is actually even higher overhead as you're basically creating the handshake yourself (which is ridiculous imo)
– tsalb
yesterday
3
3
Yeah, this was the alternative - but this is actually even higher overhead as you're basically creating the handshake yourself (which is ridiculous imo)
– tsalb
yesterday
Yeah, this was the alternative - but this is actually even higher overhead as you're basically creating the handshake yourself (which is ridiculous imo)
– tsalb
yesterday
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Salesforce Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsalesforce.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f245698%2fmapstring-object-in-auraenabled-now-failing-in-spring-19-with-value-provided%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
I have a tweet to Kris grey from Salesforce and he said he has someone looking onto it.
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
2
twitter.com/msrivastav13/status/1082345858375565314
– Mohith Shrivastava
yesterday
@MohithShrivastava thanks!
– tsalb
yesterday