JSON support for test client and response object #1416

adambyrtek · 2015-04-01T23:53:38Z

Common code has been refactored into a mixin shared between request and response classes. This is a continuation of #1408.

adambyrtek · 2015-04-02T00:00:29Z

Not ready for review yet.

flask/wrappers.py

    getter = getattr(req, 'get_data', None)
    if getter is not None:
-        return getter(cache=cache)


adambyrtek · 2015-04-02T00:51:26Z

@untitaker I suggest to close #1408 and move the conversation to this pull request, since it incorporates both changes including documentation.

untitaker · 2015-04-04T13:16:05Z

This is quite a bunch to review. I'll take a look at it sometime, but I don't have the time ATM and I'd apprechiate if somebody else looked over it too.

docs/testing.rst

+        email = 'john@example.com'
+        password = 'secret'
+        resp = c.post('/api/auth', json={'email': email, 'password': password})
+        assert verify_token(email, resp.json['token'])


untitaker · 2015-04-04T13:22:58Z

Thanks @ThiefMaster

flask/wrappers.py

-        if cache:
-            self._cached_json = rv
-        return rv
-
    def on_json_loading_failed(self, e):
        """Called if decoding of the JSON data failed.  The return value of
        this method is used by :meth:`get_json` when an error occurred.  The


adambyrtek · 2015-04-06T11:34:53Z

@untitaker @ThiefMaster Thanks a lot for the review, I've gone through all your comments, so please take one more look.

One thing that's not clear to me is what is the reason for deprecating the json property (the changelog doesn't help much)? For me it's much more elegant to write request.json['foo'] instead of request.get_json()['foo'], and properties are well-established in the Python community.

I understand that there is some computation and caching hidden under the hood, but most people working with JSON APIs won't have to worry about that, and the rest can use the getters directly if they want to.

ThiefMaster · 2015-04-06T11:36:07Z

I think you are supposed to use something like data = request.get_json() and then use data in your code. But I'm not a big fan of the deprecation either. It feels nicer to use request.json just like request.form etc.

untitaker · 2015-04-06T11:38:44Z

I think the general idea was to make resource management more explicit.

IIRC there was a Werkzeug or Flask issue where somebody expected to be able to read from the data attribute after already having accessed json, but doing so would have implicitly copied the request payload all over the place. Now you have to do it explicitly.

ThiefMaster · 2015-04-06T11:39:48Z

But it's the same for e.g. request.form - so I'd prefer not to have write uglier code for the same of someone who can't read the documentation ;)

untitaker · 2015-04-06T11:43:19Z

I'm not sure where I stand either, but I think form being still there isn't a deliberate inconsistency.

adambyrtek · 2015-04-06T11:43:50Z

I use request.json all over the place in my API, and this is a backwards-incompatible change that would make the life of my team harder, so I'm not sure whether the benefit justifies the pain. I believe it should be the person who has an unusual use case having to go the extra mile (maybe with a more meaningful error message).

untitaker · 2015-04-06T11:45:46Z

Regarding API breakage in general: To be fair, you have a lot of time to upgrade as Flask releases are really rare.

ThiefMaster · 2015-04-06T11:46:43Z

I think changing request.form to a method would be the kind of API breakage that pisses off people, even if it's in a major version bump ;)

untitaker · 2015-04-06T11:49:09Z

Hmm, I think we should move this discussion somewhere else, perhaps a new issue.

I'll keep this PR unmerged and will properly review it ~~tomorrow~~ uhh sometime. I'd like more eyes on it too.

adambyrtek · 2015-04-06T11:49:41Z

Sure, let's track this separately, and I'm happy to stay involved. You know where I stand, even when this becomes deprecated I will still use request.json on my project because I believe it leads to cleaner code, and I cannot justify the refactoring.

adambyrtek · 2015-04-06T17:27:33Z

Just to clarify, this should be ready for the final review regardless of the result of that discussion.

adambyrtek · 2015-04-12T11:16:53Z

@untitaker Gentle ping.

untitaker · 2015-04-12T12:14:09Z

@adambyrtek Could you check whether the new attrs for response show up correctly in the docs?

adambyrtek · 2015-04-12T22:36:50Z

@untitaker You mean the API docs? Now is does, it never showed up for Request by the way.

adambyrtek · 2015-04-15T08:35:11Z

@untitaker What do you think?

adambyrtek · 2015-09-28T20:57:17Z

@untitaker I prefer to keep the history for the record (unless it contains something obviously unnecessary or erroneous) so feel free to merge when you're ready to do so.

untitaker · 2015-09-28T21:00:49Z

I pinged @mitsuhiko about this again in IRC.

adambyrtek · 2015-09-28T21:10:46Z

Just to be sure you remember, you said "Will merge. Could you rebase?" some time ago (see #1416 (comment)). Anyway, I'm happy to wait for the blessing.

While we're at this, it would be great to get @mitsuhiko opinion on #1421

untitaker · 2015-09-28T21:16:53Z

Argh. Sorry. I don't know what to do.

I can't reach him.

adambyrtek · 2015-09-29T09:49:22Z

@untitaker Maybe you should just make a judgement call? I don't think this PR introduces anything revolutionary. It simply adds JSON capabilities to the response object, mostly for testing purposes.

untitaker · 2015-09-29T14:27:05Z

Yes, and @mitsuhiko has been known to oppose decisions that seemed straightforward to anybody else.

Apparently that means that no real progress can be made, but it's not my decision to judge whether that's a good outcome -- it's still Armin's project after all.

adambyrtek · 2015-09-29T20:19:34Z

Fair enough, I didn't know that he is the sole maintainer.

flask/testing.py

@@ -20,7 +21,7 @@
    from urlparse import urlsplit as url_parse


-def make_test_environ_builder(app, path='/', base_url=None, *args, **kwargs):
+def make_test_environ_builder(app, path='/', base_url=None, json=None, *args, **kwargs):


adambyrtek · 2015-11-27T00:15:52Z

@mitsuhiko I've seen your recent comment on another JSON-related issue. Would you mind taking a look at this one?

flask/wrappers.py

+        return self.get_json()
+
+    def _get_data_for_json(self, cache):
+        getter = getattr(self, 'get_data', None)


adambyrtek · 2016-04-22T16:36:02Z

Thanks for the comments. I'm happy to do the changes but only if this has a chance of moving forward.

untitaker · 2016-04-22T16:42:57Z

That is totally understandable, and thank you for all your work. I personally
want this to land in 0.11.

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 09:36:16AM -0700, Adam Byrtek wrote:

Thanks for the comments. I'm happy to do the changes but only if this has a chance of moving forward.

You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#1416 (comment)

mitsuhiko · 2016-04-22T17:34:01Z

I think it generally looks reasonable. I don't have any arguments for not merging it.

untitaker · 2016-05-04T19:00:24Z

Excellent. @adambyrtek do you have time?

untitaker · 2016-05-30T21:21:40Z

@adambyrtek So this didn't make it in time. Are you still interested in updating this?

DoWhileGeek · 2016-06-14T04:09:31Z

pallets/werkzeug#948 addresses the Response side of this issue. It needs a review if anyone wants to jump on it.

untitaker · 2016-08-19T19:27:37Z

I'm picking this up at #1984

adambyrtek reviewed Apr 2, 2015
View reviewed changes

flask/wrappers.py

getter = getattr(req, 'get_data', None)

if getter is not None:

return getter(cache=cache)

This comment was marked as off-topic.

Sign in to view

This comment was marked as off-topic.

Sign in to view

This comment was marked as off-topic.

Sign in to view

untitaker added the needs review label Apr 4, 2015

ThiefMaster reviewed Apr 4, 2015
View reviewed changes

docs/testing.rst

email = 'john@example.com'

password = 'secret'

resp = c.post('/api/auth', json={'email': email, 'password': password})

assert verify_token(email, resp.json['token'])

This comment was marked as off-topic.

Sign in to view

This comment was marked as off-topic.

Sign in to view

untitaker reviewed Apr 4, 2015
View reviewed changes

adambyrtek mentioned this pull request Apr 4, 2015

JSON support for the Flask test client #1408

Closed

adambyrtek changed the title ~~JSON support for the response object~~ JSON support for test client and response object Apr 4, 2015

untitaker mentioned this pull request Apr 6, 2015

request.json deprecation discussion #1421

Closed

johnnyg reviewed Nov 26, 2015
View reviewed changes

gregorynicholas reviewed Apr 21, 2016
View reviewed changes

flask/wrappers.py

return self.get_json()

def _get_data_for_json(self, cache):

getter = getattr(self, 'get_data', None)

This comment was marked as off-topic.

Sign in to view

This comment was marked as off-topic.

Sign in to view

untitaker assigned untitaker and unassigned mitsuhiko Apr 22, 2016

untitaker added the waiting label May 4, 2016

untitaker modified the milestones: 1.0, 0.11 May 30, 2016

jeffwidman mentioned this pull request Jun 13, 2016

Add json argument to test.Client.post() pallets/werkzeug#848

Closed

untitaker mentioned this pull request Aug 19, 2016

JSON request/response mixin #1984

Closed

untitaker closed this Aug 19, 2016

untitaker removed the waiting label Aug 19, 2016

davidism removed the needs review label Apr 19, 2017

adambyrtek deleted the response-json branch January 1, 2018 21:08

github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 14, 2020

JSON support for test client and response object #1416

JSON support for test client and response object #1416

Conversation

adambyrtek commented Apr 1, 2015

adambyrtek commented Apr 2, 2015

This comment was marked as off-topic.

This comment was marked as off-topic.

This comment was marked as off-topic.

adambyrtek commented Apr 2, 2015

untitaker commented Apr 4, 2015

This comment was marked as off-topic.

This comment was marked as off-topic.

untitaker commented Apr 4, 2015

This comment was marked as off-topic.

This comment was marked as off-topic.

This comment was marked as off-topic.

adambyrtek commented Apr 6, 2015

ThiefMaster commented Apr 6, 2015

untitaker commented Apr 6, 2015

ThiefMaster commented Apr 6, 2015

untitaker commented Apr 6, 2015

adambyrtek commented Apr 6, 2015

untitaker commented Apr 6, 2015

ThiefMaster commented Apr 6, 2015

untitaker commented Apr 6, 2015

adambyrtek commented Apr 6, 2015

adambyrtek commented Apr 6, 2015

adambyrtek commented Apr 12, 2015

untitaker commented Apr 12, 2015

adambyrtek commented Apr 12, 2015

adambyrtek commented Apr 15, 2015

adambyrtek commented Sep 28, 2015

untitaker commented Sep 28, 2015

adambyrtek commented Sep 28, 2015

untitaker commented Sep 28, 2015

adambyrtek commented Sep 29, 2015

untitaker commented Sep 29, 2015

adambyrtek commented Sep 29, 2015

This comment was marked as off-topic.

This comment was marked as off-topic.

This comment was marked as off-topic.

adambyrtek commented Nov 27, 2015

This comment was marked as off-topic.

This comment was marked as off-topic.

adambyrtek commented Apr 22, 2016

untitaker commented Apr 22, 2016

mitsuhiko commented Apr 22, 2016

untitaker commented May 4, 2016

untitaker commented May 30, 2016

DoWhileGeek commented Jun 14, 2016

untitaker commented Aug 19, 2016