Thanks @wondible
I might be misunderstanding the behaviour of at
. With this solution, wouldn’t the decoder returned by decodeRecordTypeDetails
operate on the actual name of the type?
So although the types line up, I don’t think this would work because we need to apply that decoder to a field in the original outer JSON.
I tried something which I think was similar and got the following result:
Got bad body (Problem with the value at json[0].type:
{
"id": 35,
"name": "Chair"
}
Expecting an OBJECT with a field named `type`) when attempting to load JSON!
Have I misunderstood?