✨ v3 (feature): request binding #2006

trim21 · 2022-08-08T17:20:47Z

Please provide enough information so that others can review your pull request:

related to #1821 and #2002

Explain the details for making this change. What existing problem does the pull request solve?

~~this PR add a function decorator style bind method to provide high speed and low alloc request binding.~~

this PR add a high performance and low alloc binding implement.

some changes:

data[]=john&data[]=doe won't bind to query:"data", only bind to query:"data[]" and can't bind query like data[0]=john&data[1]=doe
you can't used multiple tag together, only one of them will work.
function decorators will panic if any misused happened (eg req is not a struct type). I think there is no meaning to return a error because developer must change their code instead of handling there errors.

TODO:

trim21 · 2022-08-19T11:54:02Z

shoule we hide the original unmarshal message from encoding.TextUnmarshaler.UnmarshalText or strconv.Parse{Int|Uint|Bool}?

efectn · 2022-08-20T15:30:19Z

I reviewed this a bit today and this way seems good to me but i have a little question. Why don't we support map binding? I think we can add map support when checking the type in compiler.go

efectn · 2022-08-20T15:33:18Z

And we don't need default validator i think. Playground validator has too much and big sized indirect dependencies (gin-gonic/gin#3165). But we can support custom validators by an struct validator interface.

trim21 · 2022-08-20T22:18:19Z

Why don't we support map binding

I think we can add old methods like ctx.GetRespHeaders back for this use case.

trim21 · 2022-08-23T10:00:21Z

This PR only add JSON and XML body type, The multipart and form body need a new decoder, I'll add them in the next PR.

efectn

I added some comments. Maybe i can add some comments more in next days. Looks like great PR 🚀🚀

internal/reflectunsafe/reflectunsafe.go

binder.go

binder_compile.go

binder_test.go

ctx.go

efectn

Btw we can try to implement form, multipart form in this pr

FGYFFFF · 2023-01-11T09:07:36Z

hey, all ~ @trim21 @efectn , If the field of the structure is an array, do we need to support it?

trim21 · 2023-01-11T09:10:02Z

hey, all ~ @trim21 @efectn , If the field of the structure is an array, do we need to support it?

it's already supported in this PR I think...

https://github.com/gofiber/fiber/blob/081809e8a69649fafb59fa11dd629e9d00117a7a/bind_readme.md#quick-start

at least for (req/res)headers and query. And path param can't present an array.

FGYFFFF · 2023-01-11T09:17:42Z

	var req struct {
		Data []struct {
			Name string `query:"name"`
			Age  int    `query:"age"`
		} `query:"data"`
	}

I read the source code, "Slice" already supports it, but "Array" doesn't seem to support it yet. like blow

	type Req struct {
		ID1 [5]string `query:"id"`
	}

will occur a error for “unsupported type [5]string”.
@trim21

trim21 · 2023-01-11T09:20:34Z

	var req struct {
		Data []struct {
			Name string `query:"name"`
			Age  int    `query:"age"`
		} `query:"data"`
	}
I read the source code, "Slice" already supports it, but "Array" doesn't seem to support it yet. like blow
	type Req struct {
		ID1 [5]string `query:"id"`
	}
will occur a error for “unsupported type [5]string”. @trim21

Oh, sorry... I'm think slice .....

trim21 · 2023-01-11T09:32:10Z

	var req struct {
		Data []struct {
			Name string `query:"name"`
			Age  int    `query:"age"`
		} `query:"data"`
	}
I read the source code, "Slice" already supports it, but "Array" doesn't seem to support it yet. like blow
	type Req struct {
		ID1 [5]string `query:"id"`
	}
will occur a error for “unsupported type [5]string”. @trim21

I don't think it's a bad idea, but should it return a validation error when trying to bind q=1&q=2 to [5]int?

FGYFFFF · 2023-01-11T09:36:14Z

	var req struct {
		Data []struct {
			Name string `query:"name"`
			Age  int    `query:"age"`
		} `query:"data"`
	}
I read the source code, "Slice" already supports it, but "Array" doesn't seem to support it yet. like blow
	type Req struct {
		ID1 [5]string `query:"id"`
	}
will occur a error for “unsupported type [5]string”. @trim21
I don't think it's a bad idea, but should it return a validation error when trying to bind q=1&q=2 to [5]int?

yes~ like gin (https://github.com/gin-gonic/gin/blob/3010cbd7f4eccdbb610c510274895e083b8c058c/binding/form_mapping.go#L184), it will determine the length of the array in advance.
If possible, I can finish this FEATURE

trim21 · 2023-01-11T09:47:19Z

yes~ like gin (https://github.com/gin- gonic/gin/blob/3010cbd7f4eccdbb610c510274895e083b8c058c/binding/form_mapping.go#L184), it will determine the length of the array in advance.
If possible, I can finish this FEATURE

I'm not against this feature or you adding it in this PR, but if possible I'd like to get this PR merged first...

FGYFFFF · 2023-01-11T10:35:53Z

to get this PR merged first

I'm not trying to grab this PR, I just found some problems in the process of research, so I raised it.
Sorry, maybe because my description was not clear

trim21 · 2023-01-11T10:38:20Z

to get this PR merged first

I'm not trying to grab this PR, I just found some problems in the process of research, so I raised it. Sorry, maybe because my description was not clear

No... I didn't mean that. That's ok if you want to add feature or finish this PR, or even just re-open a new PR based on this one, it's not a problem to me.

I'm lack of time in these months and this pr bas been stalling for a while. I'm saying that because I hope you can also help finishing it 😥

FGYFFFF · 2023-01-12T09:00:23Z

ok~😄😄😄

FGYFFFF · 2023-01-13T03:11:04Z

So far, I have found some feature that need to be added in:

Array
multiple pointer (gin supported, does fiber need to support?)
customized type bind panic

I will complete these FEATURES in my free time.

ReneWerner87 · 2023-02-07T09:42:48Z

@FGYFFFF how far are you ?

FGYFFFF · 2023-02-07T09:47:34Z

@FGYFFFF how far are you ?

I'll do it as soon as I can, maybe in two weeks.

ReneWerner87 · 2023-02-07T10:08:16Z

ok perfect, thx

ReneWerner87 · 2024-01-17T23:12:54Z

@trim21 @efectn
what tasks are still open here? we can now pay more attention to v3

can you merge/refresh again ? and document the last open points so that we can actively help here or find decisions

coderabbitai · 2024-03-16T13:46:45Z

Important

Auto Review Skipped

Draft detected.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository.

To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
- I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
- Generate unit-tests for this file.
- Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
- @coderabbitai generate unit tests for this file.
- @coderabbitai modularize this function.
PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
- @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
- @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
- @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit tests.
- @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

@coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
@coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
@coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
@coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
@coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (`.coderabbit.yaml`)

You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
The JSON schema for the configuration file is available here.
If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/coderabbit-overrides.v2.json

CodeRabbit Discord Community

Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.

ReneWerner87 · 2024-03-24T19:58:47Z

todos:

Nested structs are supported. However nested slice structs are not supported. slice field decoder needs to be rewrited for that case
We need to make more check for pointer usage cases
we need to support files

ReneWerner87 · 2024-03-24T20:26:19Z

@coderabbitai can you suggest solutions for the open todos

Can you also check the existing code

coderabbitai · 2024-03-24T20:27:51Z

Tip

For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes.

@ReneWerner87, after running the script to search for relevant files, it appears there are multiple references to pointers, files, and nested structures within the codebase. This indicates that the codebase already has some handling for these concepts, but improvements or additional features might still be needed based on the open todos.

Given the complexity and breadth of the codebase, here are more detailed suggestions for each open todo based on the script's findings:

Nested Slice Structs: The codebase likely already handles nested structures to some extent. Enhancing support for nested slice structs could involve refining the recursive decoding logic to better handle slices of structs, ensuring that each element in the slice is properly decoded.
Pointer Usage Cases: The references to pointers suggest that there's already some handling of pointers in the code. Improving this could involve ensuring that all pointer-related edge cases are covered, such as correctly initializing nil pointers and handling pointer-to-pointer scenarios. Adding targeted unit tests for these cases could help ensure robustness.
File Support: The numerous references to file handling indicate that file support is already a significant part of the codebase. Enhancing file support could involve adding more comprehensive handling for multipart file uploads, including better error handling, support for large files, and possibly integrating with external storage solutions for file uploads.

For a more detailed review and specific code changes, it would be beneficial to closely examine the implementation of these features in the context of the current codebase and consider how they align with the project's overall architecture and design goals.

If there are specific areas of the code or features you'd like me to focus on, please let me know, and I can provide more targeted advice or suggestions.

Analysis chain

@ReneWerner87, I've outlined potential solutions for the open todos:

Nested Slice Structs: Enhance the decoder to recursively handle nested slice structs. This involves detecting fields that are slices of structs during decoding and applying the decoding logic to each element in the slice.
Pointer Usage Cases: Implement comprehensive checks for pointer fields to ensure correct handling of nil pointers and proper dereferencing. Adding tests for various pointer scenarios is also recommended.
File Support: For file uploads, consider handling multipart/form-data content types by parsing multipart form data, extracting file metadata and content, and providing an API for accessing uploaded files.

To provide a more detailed review of the existing code, I've initiated a script to search for relevant files. I'll follow up with more specific insights or recommendations based on the findings.

Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check for the presence of files related to the todos mentioned in the comment.
# This includes looking for files that might be related to nested structs, pointer usage, and file support.
fd --type f --exec grep -E "nested struct|pointer|file" {}

Length of output: 28118

trim21 changed the title ~~WIP: V3 request bind~~ [WIP] ✨ v3 (feature): request bind Aug 8, 2022

trim21 changed the title ~~[WIP] ✨ v3 (feature): request bind~~ [WIP] ✨ v3 (feature): request binding Aug 8, 2022

trim21 changed the title ~~[WIP] ✨ v3 (feature): request binding~~ ✨ v3 (feature): request binding Aug 8, 2022

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

trim21 marked this pull request as ready for review August 9, 2022 02:42

ReneWerner87 added 🧹 Updates v3 ✏️ Feature and removed 🧹 Updates labels Aug 9, 2022

efectn added this to the v3 milestone Aug 11, 2022

efectn linked an issue Aug 11, 2022 that may be closed by this pull request

🚀 v3 Request: New Parser for Binding #2002

Open

3 tasks

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

trim21 marked this pull request as draft August 22, 2022 03:41

trim21 force-pushed the bind branch from ceff124 to af78131 Compare August 23, 2022 09:27

trim21 marked this pull request as ready for review August 23, 2022 09:40

trim21 added 2 commits August 23, 2022 20:43

remove old binding

2cb58a2

add new bind

3251afc

trim21 force-pushed the bind branch from b9c4e33 to 3251afc Compare August 23, 2022 12:48

trim21 requested review from efectn and ReneWerner87 and removed request for efectn August 29, 2022 17:59

efectn reviewed Aug 29, 2022

View reviewed changes

internal/reflectunsafe/reflectunsafe.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

binder.go Show resolved Hide resolved

binder_compile.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

binder_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

ctx.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

efectn reviewed Aug 29, 2022

View reviewed changes

replace panic with returning error

a6696e5

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/v3-beta' into bind

21c6e40

ReneWerner87 added the ♻ Wait for Response label Feb 7, 2023

ReneWerner87 assigned FGYFFFF Feb 7, 2023

efectn added 2 commits August 6, 2023 22:56

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/v3-beta' into bind

967e52a

fix mws

8e6b3bb

efectn mentioned this pull request Feb 5, 2024

🔥 v3 (feature): Adding GetReqHeaders and GetRespHeaders #2831

Merged

20 tasks

ReneWerner87 mentioned this pull request Feb 13, 2024

📝 [Proposal]: Add options for active DisallowUnknownFields in the function BodyParser #2858

Open

3 tasks

efectn self-assigned this Mar 2, 2024

ReneWerner87 mentioned this pull request Mar 13, 2024

🩹 Fix: improper query/body parsing with embedded structs #2906

Merged

4 tasks

efectn added 2 commits March 16, 2024 16:45

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into bind

3c20e85

update somem methods

8a77269

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

✨ v3 (feature): request binding #2006

✨ v3 (feature): request binding #2006

trim21 commented Aug 8, 2022 •

edited by efectn

This comment was marked as outdated.

trim21 commented Aug 19, 2022 •

edited

efectn commented Aug 20, 2022

efectn commented Aug 20, 2022 •

edited

This comment was marked as outdated.

trim21 commented Aug 20, 2022

trim21 commented Aug 23, 2022 •

edited

efectn left a comment

efectn left a comment

FGYFFFF commented Jan 11, 2023

trim21 commented Jan 11, 2023 •

edited

FGYFFFF commented Jan 11, 2023 •

edited

trim21 commented Jan 11, 2023

trim21 commented Jan 11, 2023

FGYFFFF commented Jan 11, 2023

trim21 commented Jan 11, 2023

FGYFFFF commented Jan 11, 2023

trim21 commented Jan 11, 2023 •

edited

FGYFFFF commented Jan 12, 2023

FGYFFFF commented Jan 13, 2023 •

edited

ReneWerner87 commented Feb 7, 2023

FGYFFFF commented Feb 7, 2023

ReneWerner87 commented Feb 7, 2023

ReneWerner87 commented Jan 17, 2024 •

edited

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 16, 2024

Auto Review Skipped

Chat

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

CodeRabbit Configration File (`.coderabbit.yaml`)

CodeRabbit Discord Community

ReneWerner87 commented Mar 24, 2024

ReneWerner87 commented Mar 24, 2024

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 24, 2024

✨ v3 (feature): request binding #2006

Are you sure you want to change the base?

✨ v3 (feature): request binding #2006

Conversation

trim21 commented Aug 8, 2022 • edited by efectn

This comment was marked as outdated.

trim21 commented Aug 19, 2022 • edited

efectn commented Aug 20, 2022

efectn commented Aug 20, 2022 • edited

This comment was marked as outdated.

trim21 commented Aug 20, 2022

trim21 commented Aug 23, 2022 • edited

efectn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

efectn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

FGYFFFF commented Jan 11, 2023

trim21 commented Jan 11, 2023 • edited

FGYFFFF commented Jan 11, 2023 • edited

trim21 commented Jan 11, 2023

trim21 commented Jan 11, 2023

FGYFFFF commented Jan 11, 2023

trim21 commented Jan 11, 2023

FGYFFFF commented Jan 11, 2023

trim21 commented Jan 11, 2023 • edited

FGYFFFF commented Jan 12, 2023

FGYFFFF commented Jan 13, 2023 • edited

ReneWerner87 commented Feb 7, 2023

FGYFFFF commented Feb 7, 2023

ReneWerner87 commented Feb 7, 2023

ReneWerner87 commented Jan 17, 2024 • edited

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 16, 2024

Auto Review Skipped

Chat

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

CodeRabbit Discord Community

ReneWerner87 commented Mar 24, 2024

ReneWerner87 commented Mar 24, 2024

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 24, 2024

trim21 commented Aug 8, 2022 •

edited by efectn

trim21 commented Aug 19, 2022 •

edited

efectn commented Aug 20, 2022 •

edited

trim21 commented Aug 23, 2022 •

edited

trim21 commented Jan 11, 2023 •

edited

FGYFFFF commented Jan 11, 2023 •

edited

trim21 commented Jan 11, 2023 •

edited

FGYFFFF commented Jan 13, 2023 •

edited

ReneWerner87 commented Jan 17, 2024 •

edited

CodeRabbit Configration File (`.coderabbit.yaml`)