-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 23
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.
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
added support for specifying json convenience object #120
added support for specifying json convenience object #120
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Overall looks good to me and I'd be happy to merge. Feel free to act on my comment.
Okay looks good to me now. Have you tested it? |
Yes, I have also added a 'jsonfield' in the mulltipart.yaml test-file. |
Do you actually use |
@mishushakov nice catch! I had initially added that type, but later decided to combine the json field in the existing HttpRequestPart type. I've updated the PR (removed the unused code); Also added a testcase for JSON arrays. I've tested it locally, and for me it works. |
Very well done. One thing though: you can let the |
What happens if you use the following (valid) json:
If I'm not wrong, then |
Yes, the problem here will be if I want my json to be null. What you actually need is |
Thank you very much! We should also fix the same problem in other places. |
Allows you to conveniently use
json
field for multipart forms:The YAML will be converted to JSON, and the content-type set to 'application/json'.