Treatment for many and only parameters #731
Conversation
- A small treatment to avoid conflit with only and exclude params has been created. - An If has been created to verify if many parameter is boolean.
|
@sloria do you think that is a good approach? Could you(or another contributor) give me any suggestions for improvements? Thanks! |
| @@ -386,6 +386,22 @@ def __init__(self, nested, default=missing_, exclude=tuple(), only=None, **kwarg | |||
| self.many = kwargs.get('many', False) | |||
| self.__schema = None # Cached Schema instance | |||
| self.__updated_fields = False | |||
|
|
|||
| if not isinstance(self.many, bool): | |||
| raise ValueError('Many parameter must be boolean') | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
many does not have to be a boolean. You can pass anything, as long as it evaluates to a either truthy value if you expect a collection or a falsy value if you expect a single element.
|
|
||
| # Catch fields used at the same time | ||
| # into only and exclude parameters | ||
| fields = [item for item in only if item in list(exclude)] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You could use set intersections to do that.
|
I'm not sure we're willing to add this kind of validation.
|
|
These seem like good warnings for new users, but would likely be burdensome errors for existing users. |
|
Closing this in favor of #826 |
has been created.
Related: #406