Support to add objects (primitive and collection) as claim in token pa…

[complanboy2]

…yload

As requested @gustavoamigo we are giving support to add objects if primitive and collection types as claim in token payload.

Followed the suggestion by @lbalmaceda to make this change.
#164 (comment)

[complanboy2]

@lbalmaceda @martinoconnor Please review at your free time.
If there is a board or group of people that I should include, please let me know. thanks.

[ghost]

The added withClaim() method is not type safe, and it is not possible to overload it due to type erasure. Also, nested collections would be raw types, so there would be no guarantee as to the types they would contain.

A reasonable compromise may be to accept only primitive wrapper types, Sets and Lists and to call toString() on anything else. That would require instanceof checks at runtime which may be ugly.

[complanboy2]

The added withClaim() method is not type safe, and it is not possible to overload it due to type erasure. Also, nested collections would be raw types, so there would be no guarantee as to the types they would contain.

A reasonable compromise may be to accept only primitive wrapper types, Sets and Lists and to call toString() on anything else. That would require instanceof checks at runtime which may be ugly.

Hi @martinoconnor , thank you for the reivew. It helped fixing it better.

Agree, type safety would be an issue if consumer passes Map of custom objects. Updated the code to warn (throwing IllegalArugment) in that case. This change supports Map and/or Collection of objects of specified type/array type only. Restricted the checks to the minimal.

Please review the updated code when you have time.

[ornom0n]

Hello,

Adding this feature would allow me to migrate from JWT 2 to JWT 3 as one of the claims we use is a Map and that cannot be changed. Is anything pending here?

[complanboy2]

Hello,

Adding this feature would allow me to migrate from JWT 2 to JWT 3 as one of the claims we use is a Map and that cannot be changed. Is anything pending here?

Hi @ornom0n ,

I'm waiting on review, once the review is done, we are good to merge.
If it is helpful to you, please go ahead with the use. And please have a look at checks once, though major are passed.

[complanboy2]

Any hope for getting this reviewed and also please check, #297 as well.