Improvement: refactor expected_fields_validator

[codesankalp]

Description

As a developer,
I need validators to be fast,
so that API response time will be less.

Mocks

bridge-in-tech-backend/app/utils/validation_utils.py

Lines 157 to 164 in 68d8ff9

	expected_fields = []
	for field_input in user_input:
	for field_expected in data_model:
	if field_input == field_expected:
	expected_fields.append(field_input)
	if len(expected_fields) != len(data_model):
	return {"is_field_valid": False, "message": messages.UNEXPECTED_INPUT}
	return {"is_field_valid": True, "message": {}}

The two for loops can be implemented efficiently by using the python built-in function.
I think there is no need for two for loops for this.

Acceptance Criteria

Update [Required]

• Remove two for loops.
• Use python builtin function to return the actual validation (described in docstrings of function).

Definition of Done

• All of the required items are completed.
• Approval by 1 mentor.

Estimation

0.5 hours

[KushalBeniwal]

@codesankalp I would like to work on this issue.

[decon-harsh]

@KushalBeniwal Have you completed the mandatory setup task #244 before claiming a coding/testing issue?

[KushalBeniwal]

@decon-harsh, no, I haven't. I will do that first.

[devkapilbansal]

@KushalBeniwal comment once you do the setup task

[KushalBeniwal]

I am unable to follow from this step https://github.com/anitab-org/bridge-in-tech-backend/blob/develop/.github/ENV_SETUP_INSTRUCTION.md#4th-open-pgadmin4, as I am using wsl, so, I can only use the command line.

[decon-harsh]

I am unable to follow from this step https://github.com/anitab-org/bridge-in-tech-backend/blob/develop/.github/ENV_SETUP_INSTRUCTION.md#4th-open-pgadmin4, as I am using wsl, so, I can only use the command line.

Please join our zulip chat and ask your doubts there, we will be happy to help you with your Dev env setup. @KushalBeniwal

[y-martinez]

I would like to work on this issue if is available, but I have a question. user_input and data_model are always int arrays, right?

[y-martinez]

Hi @epicadk or @mtreacy002 a maybe possible solution could be to use the data structure set to compare if user_input and data_model are exact the same, however, I saw that in tests are falling, but the problem apparently is the code, so, I have a question, I need to verify that always user input fields contain only the expected fields of the data model? not more and not less right?, I have that doubt because so I think that I found an error in the code but I am not sure

[mtreacy002]

@y-martinez , can you please explain what you mean with

I need to verify that always user input fields contain only the expected fields of the data model? not more and not less right?, I have that doubt because so I think that I found an error in the code but I am not sure

[vj-codes]

@y-martinez any updates?