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

Jump to bottom

Add serializer to response wrapper #145

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add serializer to response wrapper #145

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

matez0
Copy link

@matez0 matez0 commented Dec 7, 2023

Note:
From python 3.8, the _unwrap method could be replaced with using functools.singledispatchmethod.

Implements #144

@matez0 matez0 force-pushed the add-serializer-to-response-wrapper branch from 4e4ac70 to e6869b9 Compare December 7, 2023 16:50
@sonarcloud SonarCloud
Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Dec 7, 2023

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 1 Code Smell

No Coverage information No Coverage information
0.0% 0.0% Duplication

@armando-rodriguez-cko armando-rodriguez-cko self-assigned this Dec 7, 2023
@matez0 matez0 mentioned this pull request Dec 7, 2023
Open
@matez0 matez0 force-pushed the add-serializer-to-response-wrapper branch from e6869b9 to 0bc370d Compare December 11, 2023 19:18
@matez0
Copy link
Author

matez0 commented Dec 11, 2023

Updated the author's and committer's email address.

@armando-rodriguez-cko armando-rodriguez-cko linked an issue Jan 12, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
Add serializer to response wrapper #144
Open
@matez0
Copy link
Author

matez0 commented Jan 19, 2024

While the README states that "Requires Python > 3.6", the build was run for Python 3.6 as well.
Since the walrus operator only introduced in Python 3.8, I still should not have used it.
The commit avoiding to use walrus operator could be squashed (fixed up) with the commit adding the serializer.
Should I do it?

@matez0 matez0 force-pushed the add-serializer-to-response-wrapper branch from a9769b7 to ea783b5 Compare February 3, 2024 11:22
@matez0 matez0 force-pushed the add-serializer-to-response-wrapper branch from ea783b5 to ade758a Compare February 23, 2024 11:16
@matez0 matez0 force-pushed the add-serializer-to-response-wrapper branch from ade758a to d87f5d0 Compare March 19, 2024 23:02
@matez0 matez0 force-pushed the add-serializer-to-response-wrapper branch from d87f5d0 to 2287b32 Compare May 1, 2024 21:03
@matez0
Copy link
Author

matez0 commented May 1, 2024

Rename decorator and argument name for more readability.

@matez0 matez0 force-pushed the add-serializer-to-response-wrapper branch from 2287b32 to bb08bcb Compare May 1, 2024 21:06
@matez0
Copy link
Author

matez0 commented May 1, 2024

Rebased onto the top of main.

matez0 added 2 commits June 30, 2024 12:03
@matez0
Add serializer to response wrapper
ce92fd1 
It can be useful, when the response fully or partially need to be stored
in a database in a JSON serialized form.

From python 3.8, the `_unwrap` method could be replaced with
using singledispatchmethod.
@matez0
Avoid using walrus operator to stay compatible with python version ea…
5f9fec1 
…rlier than 3.8
@matez0 matez0 force-pushed the add-serializer-to-response-wrapper branch from bb08bcb to 5f9fec1 Compare June 30, 2024 10:03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@armando-rodriguez-cko armando-rodriguez-cko Awaiting requested review from armando-rodriguez-cko

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees

@armando-rodriguez-cko armando-rodriguez-cko

Labels
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add serializer to response wrapper
2 participants
@matez0 @armando-rodriguez-cko