-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 414
Fix/3159 pydantic model incorrect serialization #3421
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
tetelio
wants to merge
8
commits into
devel
Choose a base branch
from
fix/3159-pydantic-model-incorrect-serialization
base: devel
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from 5 commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
f540e7f
Stop serializing to dict if pydantic model is being yielded and if yi…
tetelio f5bbbbc
Add test for pydantic validation with serialization if pydantic model
tetelio bf346b0
Add docstring back
tetelio 9d6571e
Add back __str__ method removed by accident
tetelio 35dd144
Lint correctly
tetelio 49681d4
Add simple choice for pydantic objects to be passed after extraction …
tetelio c7b07e3
Add unit test for extract validator and pipeline integration test
tetelio fd2875a
Fix lint
tetelio File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this is a good catch. the model that is used to validate may be different from model instances passed to pipeline. even if the model is the same there are some weird cases or revalidation was requested. so we cannot just skip validation here.
still - doing this check and going back to dict is IMO not intuitive and expensive. we also probe just a first element and assume that the list is of uniform item types.
overall I think we need something simpler here