Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

to_dict on empty nested types #200

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

to_dict on empty nested types #200

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
6ad9bab
to_dict on empty nested types (https://github.com/danielgtaylor/pytho…
kilimnik Jan 19, 2021
cef8f71
Removed lazy initialization
kilimnik Jan 20, 2021
9b7dd26
removed lazy initialization from tests
kilimnik Jan 20, 2021
d213abc
Fixed formatting
kilimnik Jan 20, 2021
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
7 changes: 6 additions & 1 deletion src/betterproto/__init__.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -591,7 +591,6 @@ def __getattribute__(self, name: str) -> Any:
return value

value = self._get_field_default(name)
super().__setattr__(name, value)
return value

def __setattr__(self, attr: str, value: Any) -> None:
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -875,6 +874,10 @@ def parse(self: T, data: bytes) -> T:
)

current = getattr(self, field_name)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This should be moved below that if statement

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The line 879 uses the current attribute, so putting that below doesn't make any sense


if self.__raw_get(field_name) == PLACEHOLDER:
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This should use is not ==

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

And maybe there should be a return on this

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why should there be a return here? The for loop has to continue

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry I meant continue

setattr(self, field_name, current)

if meta.proto_type == TYPE_MAP:
# Value represents a single key/value pair entry in the map.
current[value.key] = value.value
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -972,6 +975,8 @@ def to_dict(
)
):
output[cased_name] = value.to_dict(casing, include_default_values)
elif self.__raw_get(field_name) != PLACEHOLDER:
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Similar thing here, should be is not

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I was thinking about that but I saw line 540 doing the same comparison

output[cased_name] = {}
elif meta.proto_type == TYPE_MAP:
for k in value:
if hasattr(value[k], "to_dict"):
Expand Down
6 changes: 3 additions & 3 deletions tests/test_features.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ class Foo(betterproto.Message):
assert betterproto.serialized_on_wire(foo.bar) is False

# Serialized after setting something
foo.bar.baz = 1
foo.bar = Bar(baz=1)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Changing all this is a regression if this PR breaks this

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I know that isn't great. My PR would break lazy initialization. If you want to keep that, I have to think of another implementation. But lazy initialization also isn't in the google implementation, so I thought it wouldn't be important.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Well breaking things isn't good. I know how this can be fixed it's been discussed before but it involves every field having a serialized attribute or similar.

assert betterproto.serialized_on_wire(foo.bar) is True

# Still has it after setting the default value
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ class Foo(betterproto.Message):
assert foo.bar == 0
assert betterproto.which_one_of(foo, "group1")[0] == "baz"

foo.sub.val = 1
foo.sub = Sub(val=1)
assert betterproto.serialized_on_wire(foo.sub)

foo.abc = "test"
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ def test_recursive_message_defaults():
assert msg != RecursiveMessage(
name="bob", intermediate=Intermediate(42), child=RecursiveMessage(name="jude")
)
msg.child.child.name = "jude"
msg.child = RecursiveMessage(child=RecursiveMessage(name="jude"))
assert msg == RecursiveMessage(
name="bob",
intermediate=Intermediate(42),
Expand Down