You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When using pydantic we could get rid of our jsonschema files as validation would be performed by pydantic itself.
This seemed like a good idea (and still is), but as we migrated now to dataclasses for our internal model, maintaining supported properties in two places (model class, schema) could be avoided by using pydantic (which also supported dataclasses, so the model would not have to be changed).
Currently, we use metadata for dataclass fields, which is very handy, we need to find ways how something similar can be supported with pydantic before we make the switch.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In GitLab by @netomi on May 23, 2023, 09:01
When using pydantic we could get rid of our jsonschema files as validation would be performed by pydantic itself.
This seemed like a good idea (and still is), but as we migrated now to dataclasses for our internal model, maintaining supported properties in two places (model class, schema) could be avoided by using pydantic (which also supported dataclasses, so the model would not have to be changed).
Currently, we use metadata for dataclass fields, which is very handy, we need to find ways how something similar can be supported with pydantic before we make the switch.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: