Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Find centralized, trusted content and collaborate around the technologies you use most.

Learn more about Collectives

Teams

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

Learn more about Teams

I receive a JSON object from an AJAX call to a REST server. This object has property names that match my TypeScript class (this is a follow-on to this question ).

What is the best way to initialize it? I don't think this will work because the class (& JSON object) have members that are lists of objects and members that are classes, and those classes have members that are lists and/or classes.

But I'd prefer an approach that looks up the member names and assigns them across, creating lists and instantiating classes as needed, so I don't have to write explicit code for every member in every class (there's a LOT!)

Why did you ask this again (as the answer I provided in the other question said this wouldn't work and that it was about copying properties into an existing object)? WiredPrairie Apr 5, 2014 at 20:45 @WiredPrairie this question is different, it is asking if I can walk the properties one by one and assign them across. The other questions was asking if I could cast it. David Thielen Apr 6, 2014 at 17:04 @WiredPrairie cont: If you keep diving into properties until you get to just the primitive types, then those can be assigned across. David Thielen Apr 6, 2014 at 17:10 It's still copying all of the values just as I suggested you'd need to do. There's no new way to do this in TypeScript as it's a fundamental design of JavaScript. For large objects, you might not want to copy any values and just "act on" the data structure instead. WiredPrairie Apr 6, 2014 at 18:30

These are some quick shots at this to show a few different ways. They are by no means "complete" and as a disclaimer, I don't think it's a good idea to do it like this. Also the code isn't too clean since I just typed it together rather quickly.

Also as a note: Of course deserializable classes need to have default constructors as is the case in all other languages where I'm aware of deserialization of any kind. Of course, Javascript won't complain if you call a non-default constructor with no arguments, but the class better be prepared for it then (plus, it wouldn't really be the "typescripty way").

Option #1: No run-time information at all

The problem with this approach is mostly that the name of any member must match its class. Which automatically limits you to one member of same type per class and breaks several rules of good practice. I strongly advise against this, but just list it here because it was the first "draft" when I wrote this answer (which is also why the names are "Foo" etc.).

module Environment {
    export class Sub {
        id: number;
    export class Foo {
        baz: number;
        Sub: Sub;
function deserialize(json, environment, clazz) {
    var instance = new clazz();
    for(var prop in json) {
        if(!json.hasOwnProperty(prop)) {
            continue;
        if(typeof json[prop] === 'object') {
            instance[prop] = deserialize(json[prop], environment, environment[prop]);
        } else {
            instance[prop] = json[prop];
    return instance;
var json = {
    baz: 42,
    Sub: {
        id: 1337
var instance = deserialize(json, Environment, Environment.Foo);
console.log(instance);

Option #2: The name property

To get rid of the problem in option #1, we need to have some kind of information of what type a node in the JSON object is. The problem is that in Typescript, these things are compile-time constructs and we need them at runtime – but runtime objects simply have no awareness of their properties until they are set.

One way to do it is by making classes aware of their names. You need this property in the JSON as well, though. Actually, you only need it in the json:

module Environment {
    export class Member {
        private __name__ = "Member";
        id: number;
    export class ExampleClass {
        private __name__ = "ExampleClass";
        mainId: number;
        firstMember: Member;
        secondMember: Member;
function deserialize(json, environment) {
    var instance = new environment[json.__name__]();
    for(var prop in json) {
        if(!json.hasOwnProperty(prop)) {
            continue;
        if(typeof json[prop] === 'object') {
            instance[prop] = deserialize(json[prop], environment);
        } else {
            instance[prop] = json[prop];
    return instance;
var json = {
    __name__: "ExampleClass",
    mainId: 42,
    firstMember: {
        __name__: "Member",
        id: 1337
    secondMember: {
        __name__: "Member",
        id: -1
var instance = deserialize(json, Environment);
console.log(instance);

Option #3: Explicitly stating member types

As stated above, the type information of class members is not available at runtime – that is unless we make it available. We only need to do this for non-primitive members and we are good to go:

interface Deserializable {
    getTypes(): Object;
class Member implements Deserializable {
    id: number;
    getTypes() {
        // since the only member, id, is primitive, we don't need to
        // return anything here
        return {};
class ExampleClass implements Deserializable {
    mainId: number;
    firstMember: Member;
    secondMember: Member;
    getTypes() {
        return {
            // this is the duplication so that we have
            // run-time type information :/
            firstMember: Member,
            secondMember: Member
function deserialize(json, clazz) {
    var instance = new clazz(),
        types = instance.getTypes();
    for(var prop in json) {
        if(!json.hasOwnProperty(prop)) {
            continue;
        if(typeof json[prop] === 'object') {
            instance[prop] = deserialize(json[prop], types[prop]);
        } else {
            instance[prop] = json[prop];
    return instance;
var json = {
    mainId: 42,
    firstMember: {
        id: 1337
    secondMember: {
        id: -1
var instance = deserialize(json, ExampleClass);
console.log(instance);

Option #4: The verbose, but neat way

Update 01/03/2016: As @GameAlchemist pointed out in the comments (idea, implementation), as of Typescript 1.7, the solution described below can be written in a better way using class/property decorators.

Serialization is always a problem and in my opinion, the best way is a way that just isn't the shortest. Out of all the options, this is what I'd prefer because the author of the class has full control over the state of deserialized objects. If I had to guess, I'd say that all other options, sooner or later, will get you in trouble (unless Javascript comes up with a native way for dealing with this).

Really, the following example doesn't do the flexibility justice. It really does just copy the class's structure. The difference you have to keep in mind here, though, is that the class has full control to use any kind of JSON it wants to control the state of the entire class (you could calculate things etc.).

interface Serializable<T> {
    deserialize(input: Object): T;
class Member implements Serializable<Member> {
    id: number;
    deserialize(input) {
        this.id = input.id;
        return this;
class ExampleClass implements Serializable<ExampleClass> {
    mainId: number;
    firstMember: Member;
    secondMember: Member;
    deserialize(input) {
        this.mainId = input.mainId;
        this.firstMember = new Member().deserialize(input.firstMember);
        this.secondMember = new Member().deserialize(input.secondMember);
        return this;
var json = {
    mainId: 42,
    firstMember: {
        id: 1337
    secondMember: {
        id: -1
var instance = new ExampleClass().deserialize(json);
console.log(instance);
                Option #4 is what I'd call a reasonable way to go. You still need to write the deserialization code, but it's in the same class and fully controllable. If you're coming from Java, then this is comparable to having to write equals or toString methods (only that you usually have them auto-generated). It shouldn't be too hard to write a generator for deserialize if you wanted to, but it just can't be run-time automation.
– Ingo Bürk
                Apr 6, 2014 at 17:11
                @IngoBürk, I know I am asking this question 2 years later but how will this work on array of objects? The sample code above works fine for JSON object. how can it be used for array of objects?
– Pratik Gaikwad
                Jan 12, 2016 at 20:22
                A side remark : since the 1.7, (admittedly more recent than your answer), typescript provides class/property decorators that allows to write the 4th solution in a neater way.
– GameAlchemist
                Jan 14, 2016 at 9:20
                The best documentation i found is a StackOverflow answer : stackoverflow.com/a/29837695/856501  . I used decorators in a project of mine, and although i'd like a few other features i have to say they work like a charm.
– GameAlchemist
                Feb 23, 2016 at 10:08
                I wouldn't jump on decorators for a production project just yet - keep in mind they are still an experimental feature. I wouldn't base real-world code on "experiments" because as far as we are concerned they may be gone in the next version and you'd have to rewrite a bunch of code or be forever stuck on an old TS version. Just my $.02
– RVP
                Apr 19, 2016 at 15:39

you can use Object.assign I don't know when this was added, I'm currently using Typescript 2.0.2, and this appears to be an ES6 feature.

client.fetch( '' ).then( response => {
        return response.json();
    } ).then( json => {
        let hal : HalJson = Object.assign( new HalJson(), json );
        log.debug( "json", hal );

here's HalJson

export class HalJson {
    _links: HalLinks;
export class HalLinks implements Links {
export interface Links {
    readonly [text: string]: Link;
export interface Link {
    readonly href: URL;

here's what chrome says it is

HalJson {_links: Object}
_links
Object
public
Object
"http://localhost:9000/v0/public

so you can see it doesn't do the assign recursively

so, basically, it's this: Object.assign. Why do we have two lexicon-like answers above this one then? – phil294 Dec 18, 2016 at 0:57 @Blauhim Because Object.assign will not work recursively, and not instantiate correct object types, leaving values as Object instances. While it is fine for trivial tasks, complex type serialization is not possible with it. For example, if a class property is of a custom class type, JSON.parse + Object.assign will instantiate that property to Object. Side-effects include missing methods and accessors. – John Weisz Jan 4, 2017 at 14:32 @JohnWeisz the top level class of object assign does have the correct type, and I mentioned the recursive thing in this... that said, YMMV, and those might be deal breakers. – xenoterracide Jan 5, 2017 at 2:53 Quoted directly from the question: "the class have members that are lists of objects and members that are classes, and those classes have members that are lists and/or classes [...] I'd prefer an approach that looks up the member names and assigns them across, creating lists and instantiating classes as needed, so I don't have to write explicit code for every member in every class" -- which is not the case with Object.assign, where it still comes down to writing nested instantiation by hand. This approach is fine for very simple, tutorial-level objects, but not for real use. – John Weisz Jan 9, 2017 at 15:30 @JohnWeisz sure, mostly answered with this because it wasn't in any answers and seemed simple for some use cases. I'm certain it could also be used in combination with other answers such as reflection, in order to do what you're looking for. I also wrote it in part so that I would remember it later. Looking at these answers and having used and written much more powerful libraries there doesn't appear to be anything available for "real use". – xenoterracide Jan 9, 2017 at 15:40

The root of the complexity of this problem is that we need to deserialize JSON at runtime using type information that only exists at compile time. This requires that type-information is somehow made available at runtime.

Fortunately, this can be solved in a very elegant and robust way with decorators and ReflectDecorators:

  • Use property decorators on properties which are subject to serialization, to record metadata information and store that information somewhere, for example on the class prototype
  • Feed this metadata information to a recursive initializer (deserializer)
  • Recording Type-Information

    With a combination of ReflectDecorators and property decorators, type information can be easily recorded about a property. A rudimentary implementation of this approach would be:

    function JsonMember(target: any, propertyKey: string) {
        var metadataFieldKey = "__propertyTypes__";
        // Get the already recorded type-information from target, or create
        // empty object if this is the first property.
        var propertyTypes = target[metadataFieldKey] || (target[metadataFieldKey] = {});
        // Get the constructor reference of the current property.
        // This is provided by TypeScript, built-in (make sure to enable emit
        // decorator metadata).
        propertyTypes[propertyKey] = Reflect.getMetadata("design:type", target, propertyKey);
    

    For any given property, the above snippet will add a reference of the constructor function of the property to the hidden __propertyTypes__ property on the class prototype. For example:

    class Language {
        @JsonMember // String
        name: string;
        @JsonMember// Number
        level: number;
    class Person {
        @JsonMember // String
        name: string;
        @JsonMember// Language
        language: Language;
    

    And that's it, we have the required type-information at runtime, which can now be processed.

    Processing Type-Information

    We first need to obtain an Object instance using JSON.parse -- after that, we can iterate over the entires in __propertyTypes__ (collected above) and instantiate the required properties accordingly. The type of the root object must be specified, so that the deserializer has a starting-point.

    Again, a dead simple implementation of this approach would be:

    function deserialize<T>(jsonObject: any, Constructor: { new (): T }): T {
        if (!Constructor || !Constructor.prototype.__propertyTypes__ || !jsonObject || typeof jsonObject !== "object") {
            // No root-type with usable type-information is available.
            return jsonObject;
        // Create an instance of root-type.
        var instance: any = new Constructor();
        // For each property marked with @JsonMember, do...
        Object.keys(Constructor.prototype.__propertyTypes__).forEach(propertyKey => {
            var PropertyType = Constructor.prototype.__propertyTypes__[propertyKey];
            // Deserialize recursively, treat property type as root-type.
            instance[propertyKey] = deserialize(jsonObject[propertyKey], PropertyType);
        return instance;
    
    var json = '{ "name": "John Doe", "language": { "name": "en", "level": 5 } }';
    var person: Person = deserialize(JSON.parse(json), Person);
    

    The above idea has a big advantage of deserializing by expected types (for complex/object values), instead of what is present in the JSON. If a Person is expected, then it is a Person instance that is created. With some additional security measures in place for primitive types and arrays, this approach can be made secure, that resists any malicious JSON.

    Edge Cases

    However, if you are now happy that the solution is that simple, I have some bad news: there is a vast number of edge cases that need to be taken care of. Only some of which are:

  • Arrays and array elements (especially in nested arrays)
  • Polymorphism
  • Abstract classes and interfaces
  • If you don't want to fiddle around with all of these (I bet you don't), I'd be glad to recommend a working experimental version of a proof-of-concept utilizing this approach, TypedJSON -- which I created to tackle this exact problem, a problem I face myself daily.

    Due to how decorators are still being considered experimental, I wouldn't recommend using it for production use, but so far it served me well.

    Great work, you've come up with a very elegant solution to a problem that has been troubling me for a while. I'll be following your project very closely ! – John Strickler Jan 9, 2017 at 15:24

    I've created a tool that generates TypeScript interfaces and a runtime "type map" for performing runtime typechecking against the results of JSON.parse: ts.quicktype.io

    For example, given this JSON:

    "name": "David", "pets": [ "name": "Smoochie", "species": "rhino"

    quicktype produces the following TypeScript interface and type map:

    export interface Person {
        name: string;
        pets: Pet[];
    export interface Pet {
        name:    string;
        species: string;
    const typeMap: any = {
        Person: {
            name: "string",
            pets: array(object("Pet")),
        Pet: {
            name: "string",
            species: "string",
    

    Then we check the result of JSON.parse against the type map:

    export function fromJson(json: string): Person {
        return cast(JSON.parse(json), object("Person"));
    

    I've left out some code, but you can try quicktype for the details.

    After doing many hours of research and trying my hand at a couple of parsing techniques, I can say this is an excellent solution -- mainly because decorators are still experimental. * The original link is broken for me; but ts.quicktype.io works. * Converting the JSON to JSON Schema is a good first step. – LexH Jul 29, 2018 at 5:07

    I've been using this guy to do the job: https://github.com/weichx/cerialize

    It's very simple yet powerful. It supports:

  • Serialization & deserialization of a whole tree of objects.
  • Persistent & transient properties on the same object.
  • Hooks to customize the (de)serialization logic.
  • It can (de)serialize into an existing instance (great for Angular) or generate new instances.
  • Example:

    class Tree {
      @deserialize public species : string; 
      @deserializeAs(Leaf) public leafs : Array<Leaf>;  //arrays do not need extra specifications, just a type.
      @deserializeAs(Bark, 'barkType') public bark : Bark;  //using custom type and custom key name
      @deserializeIndexable(Leaf) public leafMap : {[idx : string] : Leaf}; //use an object as a map
    class Leaf {
      @deserialize public color : string;
      @deserialize public blooming : boolean;
      @deserializeAs(Date) public bloomedAt : Date;
    class Bark {
      @deserialize roughness : number;
    var json = {
      species: 'Oak',
      barkType: { roughness: 1 },
      leafs: [ {color: 'red', blooming: false, bloomedAt: 'Mon Dec 07 2015 11:48:20 GMT-0500 (EST)' } ],
      leafMap: { type1: { some leaf data }, type2: { some leaf data } }
    var tree: Tree = Deserialize(json, Tree);
      static deserialize(input:any): Person {
        return new Person(input.id, input.name, input.title);
    var person = Person.deserialize({id: 'P123', name: 'Bob', title: 'Mr'});
    

    Leveraging the ability to define properties in the constructor lets it be concise.

    This gets you a typed object (vs all the answers that use Object.assign or some variant, which give you an Object) and doesn't require external libraries or decorators.

    This is my approach (very simple):

    const jsonObj: { [key: string]: any } = JSON.parse(jsonStr);
    for (const key in jsonObj) {
      if (!jsonObj.hasOwnProperty(key)) {
        continue;
      console.log(key); // Key
      console.log(jsonObj[key]); // Value
      // Your logic...
    

    Option #5: Using Typescript constructors and jQuery.extend

    This seems to be the most maintainable method: add a constructor that takes as parameter the json structure, and extend the json object. That way you can parse a json structure into the whole application model.

    There is no need to create interfaces, or listing properties in constructor.

    export class Company
        Employees : Employee[];
        constructor( jsonData: any )
            jQuery.extend( this, jsonData);
            // apply the same principle to linked objects:
            if ( jsonData.Employees )
                this.Employees = jQuery.map( jsonData.Employees , (emp) => {
                    return new Employee ( emp );  });
        calculateSalaries() : void { .... }
    export class Employee
        name: string;
        salary: number;
        city: string;
        constructor( jsonData: any )
            jQuery.extend( this, jsonData);
            // case where your object's property does not match the json's:
            this.city = jsonData.town;
    

    In your ajax callback where you receive a company to calculate salaries:

    onReceiveCompany( jsonCompany : any ) 
       let newCompany = new Company( jsonCompany );
       // call the methods on your newCompany object ...
       newCompany.calculateSalaries()
                    @whale_steward I would assume the author is referring to the jQuery library. In the JavaScript world, '$' is very often someone using jQuery.
    – Nick Roth
                    Feb 5, 2017 at 21:03
                    yes I update the answer to replace $ by jQuery. import jQuery.js in the html head, and install and add @types/jquery in your package.json, devDependencies section.
    – Anthony Brenelière
                    Feb 6, 2017 at 8:46
                    Note that in Javascript, you should do Object.assign, which removes this dependency to jQuery.
    – Léon Pelletier
                    Oct 30, 2018 at 16:28
    

    The best I found for this purpose is the class-transformer

    That's how you use it:

    Some class:

    export class Foo {
        name: string;
        @Type(() => Bar)
        bar: Bar;
        public someFunction = (test: string): boolean => {
    // the docs say "import [this shim] in a global place, like app.ts" 
    import 'reflect-metadata';
    // import this function where you need to use it
    import { plainToClass } from 'class-transformer';
    export class SomeService {
      anyFunction() {
        u = plainToClass(Foo, JSONobj);
    

    If you use the @Type decorator nested properties will be created, too.

    The 4th option described above is a simple and nice way to do it, which has to be combined with the 2nd option in the case where you have to handle a class hierarchy like for instance a member list which is any of a occurences of subclasses of a Member super class, eg Director extends Member or Student extends Member. In that case you have to give the subclass type in the json format

    import { A, B, AFactory, BFactory } from "./deserialize";
    // create a factory, simplified by DI
    const aFactory = new AFactory(new BFactory());
    // get an anon js object like you'd get from the http call
    const data = { bId: 1, date: '2017-1-1' };
    // create a real model from the anon js object
    const a = aFactory.create(data);
    // confirm instances e.g. dates are Dates 
    console.log('a.date is instanceof Date', a.date instanceof Date);
    console.log('a.b is instanceof B', a.b instanceof B);
    
  • keeps your classes simple
  • injection available to the factories for flexibility
  • I personally prefer option #3 of @Ingo Bürk. And I improved his codes to support an array of complex data and Array of primitive data.

    interface IDeserializable {
      getTypes(): Object;
    class Utility {
      static deserializeJson<T>(jsonObj: object, classType: any): T {
        let instanceObj = new classType();
        let types: IDeserializable;
        if (instanceObj && instanceObj.getTypes) {
          types = instanceObj.getTypes();
        for (var prop in jsonObj) {
          if (!(prop in instanceObj)) {
            continue;
          let jsonProp = jsonObj[prop];
          if (this.isObject(jsonProp)) {
            instanceObj[prop] =
              types && types[prop]
                ? this.deserializeJson(jsonProp, types[prop])
                : jsonProp;
          } else if (this.isArray(jsonProp)) {
            instanceObj[prop] = [];
            for (let index = 0; index < jsonProp.length; index++) {
              const elem = jsonProp[index];
              if (this.isObject(elem) && types && types[prop]) {
                instanceObj[prop].push(this.deserializeJson(elem, types[prop]));
              } else {
                instanceObj[prop].push(elem);
          } else {
            instanceObj[prop] = jsonProp;
        return instanceObj;
      //#region ### get types ###
       * check type of value be string
       * @param {*} value
      static isString(value: any) {
        return typeof value === "string" || value instanceof String;
       * check type of value be array
       * @param {*} value
      static isNumber(value: any) {
        return typeof value === "number" && isFinite(value);
       * check type of value be array
       * @param {*} value
      static isArray(value: any) {
        return value && typeof value === "object" && value.constructor === Array;
       * check type of value be object
       * @param {*} value
      static isObject(value: any) {
        return value && typeof value === "object" && value.constructor === Object;
       * check type of value be boolean
       * @param {*} value
      static isBoolean(value: any) {
        return typeof value === "boolean";
      //#endregion
    // #region ### Models ###
    class Hotel implements IDeserializable {
      id: number = 0;
      name: string = "";
      address: string = "";
      city: City = new City(); // complex data
      roomTypes: Array<RoomType> = []; // array of complex data
      facilities: Array<string> = []; // array of primitive data
      // getter example
      get nameAndAddress() {
        return `${this.name} ${this.address}`;
      // function example
      checkRoom() {
        return true;
      // this function will be use for getting run-time type information
      getTypes() {
        return {
          city: City,
          roomTypes: RoomType
    class RoomType implements IDeserializable {
      id: number = 0;
      name: string = "";
      roomPrices: Array<RoomPrice> = [];
      // getter example
      get totalPrice() {
        return this.roomPrices.map(x => x.price).reduce((a, b) => a + b, 0);
      getTypes() {
        return {
          roomPrices: RoomPrice
    class RoomPrice {
      price: number = 0;
      date: string = "";
    class City {
      id: number = 0;
      name: string = "";
    // #endregion
    // #region ### test code ###
    var jsonObj = {
      id: 1,
      name: "hotel1",
      address: "address1",
      city: {
        id: 1,
        name: "city1"
      roomTypes: [
          id: 1,
          name: "single",
          roomPrices: [
              price: 1000,
              date: "2020-02-20"
              price: 1500,
              date: "2020-02-21"
          id: 2,
          name: "double",
          roomPrices: [
              price: 2000,
              date: "2020-02-20"
              price: 2500,
              date: "2020-02-21"
      facilities: ["facility1", "facility2"]
    var hotelInstance = Utility.deserializeJson<Hotel>(jsonObj, Hotel);
    console.log(hotelInstance.city.name);
    console.log(hotelInstance.nameAndAddress); // getter
    console.log(hotelInstance.checkRoom()); // function
    console.log(hotelInstance.roomTypes[0].totalPrice); // getter
    // #endregion
                    This will not actually produce a runtime instance of your expected object type. It will appear to work when your type only has primitive properties, but will fail when a type has methods. Interface definitions are also not available at runtime (only build time).
    – Todd
                    Jan 22, 2017 at 3:40
    

    My approach is slightly different. I do not copy properties into new instances, I just change the prototype of existing POJOs (may not work well on older browsers). Each class is responsible for providing a SetPrototypes method to set the prototoypes of any child objects, which in turn provide their own SetPrototypes methods.

    (I also use a _Type property to get the class name of unknown objects but that can be ignored here)

    class ParentClass
        public ID?: Guid;
        public Child?: ChildClass;
        public ListOfChildren?: ChildClass[];
         * Set the prototypes of all objects in the graph.
         * Used for recursive prototype assignment on a graph via ObjectUtils.SetPrototypeOf.
         * @param pojo Plain object received from API/JSON to be given the class prototype.
        private static SetPrototypes(pojo: ParentClass): void
            ObjectUtils.SetPrototypeOf(pojo.Child, ChildClass);
            ObjectUtils.SetPrototypeOfAll(pojo.ListOfChildren, ChildClass);
    class ChildClass
        public ID?: Guid;
        public GrandChild?: GrandChildClass;
         * Set the prototypes of all objects in the graph.
         * Used for recursive prototype assignment on a graph via ObjectUtils.SetPrototypeOf.
         * @param pojo Plain object received from API/JSON to be given the class prototype.
        private static SetPrototypes(pojo: ChildClass): void
            ObjectUtils.SetPrototypeOf(pojo.GrandChild, GrandChildClass);
    

    Here is ObjectUtils.ts:

    * ClassType lets us specify arguments as class variables. * (where ClassType == window[ClassName]) type ClassType = { new(...args: any[]): any; }; * The name of a class as opposed to the class itself. * (where ClassType == window[ClassName]) type ClassName = string & {}; abstract class ObjectUtils * Set the prototype of an object to the specified class. * Does nothing if source or type are null. * Throws an exception if type is not a known class type. * If type has the SetPrototypes method then that is called on the source * to perform recursive prototype assignment on an object graph. * SetPrototypes is declared private on types because it should only be called * by this method. It does not (and must not) set the prototype of the object * itself - only the protoypes of child properties, otherwise it would cause a * loop. Thus a public method would be misleading and not useful on its own. * https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9959727/proto-vs-prototype-in-javascript public static SetPrototypeOf(source: any, type: ClassType | ClassName): any let classType = (typeof type === "string") ? window[type] : type; if (!source || !classType) return source; // Guard/contract utility ExGuard.IsValid(classType.prototype, "type", <any>type); if ((<any>Object).setPrototypeOf) (<any>Object).setPrototypeOf(source, classType.prototype); else if (source.__proto__) source.__proto__ = classType.prototype.__proto__; if (typeof classType["SetPrototypes"] === "function") classType["SetPrototypes"](source); return source; * Set the prototype of a list of objects to the specified class. * Throws an exception if type is not a known class type. public static SetPrototypeOfAll(source: any[], type: ClassType): void if (!source) return; for (var i = 0; i < source.length; i++) this.SetPrototypeOf(source[i], type);

    Usage:

    let pojo = SomePlainOldJavascriptObjectReceivedViaAjax;
    let parentObject = ObjectUtils.SetPrototypeOf(pojo, ParentClass);
    // parentObject is now a proper ParentClass instance
                    This approach does not actually work as expected. If you inspect the runtime results, baz will be of type Object and not type Bar. It works in this simple case because Bar has no methods (just primitive properties). If Bar had a method like isEnabled(), this approach would fail since that method would not be in the serialized JSON string.
    – Todd
                    Jan 22, 2017 at 3:39
            

    Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!

    • 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.