refactor!: Introduce fully typed clients [WIP] #554
Conversation
vdusek
added
the
t-tooling
vdusek
changed the title
vdusek
force-pushed
the
typed-clients
branch
2 times, most recently
from
e470329 to
64a173b
Compare
vdusek
force-pushed
the
typed-clients
branch
from
64a173b to
c410e21
Compare
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #554 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 76.01% 84.85% +8.83%
==========================================
Files 42 41 -1
Lines 2468 3888 +1420
==========================================
+ Hits 1876 3299 +1423
+ Misses 592 589 -3
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
vdusek
modified the milestones:
129th sprint - Tooling team,
130th sprint - Tooling team
| super().__init__(*args, resource_path=resource_path, **kwargs) | ||
|
|
||
| def list(self) -> ListPage[dict]: | ||
| def list(self) -> ListPage[EnvVar]: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This ListPage is not fully based on API. API returns only total + items , so the rest is made up: count, offset, limit, desc
This is already in code, but since this aims at improving the API....
Fixing it would complicate the types quite a bit though
|
|
||
|
|
||
| class Data(PaginationResponse): | ||
| items: list[ActorShort] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How is this generated?
Real response is like this:
"data": {
"total": ...,
"count": ...,
"offset": ...,
"limit": ...,
"desc": ...,
"items": [...
Is the spec incorrect?
| class PricingModel3(Enum): | ||
| FREE = 'FREE' | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| class FreeActorPricingInfo(CommonActorPricingInfo): | ||
| pricing_model: Annotated[Literal['FREE'], Field(alias='pricingModel')] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So is this literal or Enum?
|
|
||
|
|
||
| class Data3(PaginationResponse): | ||
| items: list[WebhookShort] | None = None |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How is this generated?
Real response is like this:
"data": {
"total": ...,
"count": ...,
"offset": ...,
"limit": ...,
"desc": ...,
"items": [...
Is the spec incorrect?
| stats: KeyValueStoreStats | None = None | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| class Data7(PaginationResponse): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How is this generated?
Real response is like this:
"data": {
"total": ...,
"count": ...,
"offset": ...,
"limit": ...,
"desc": ...,
"items": [...
Is the spec incorrect?
| class Data8(BaseModel): | ||
| items: list[Item] | ||
| count: Annotated[float, Field(examples=[2])] | ||
| limit: Annotated[float, Field(examples=[2])] | ||
| exclusive_start_key: Annotated[str | None, Field(alias='exclusiveStartKey', examples=['some-key'])] = None | ||
| is_truncated: Annotated[bool, Field(alias='isTruncated', examples=[True])] | ||
| next_exclusive_start_key: Annotated[str | None, Field(alias='nextExclusiveStartKey', examples=['third-key'])] = None | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| class ListOfKeysResponse(BaseModel): | ||
| data: Data8 | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| class GetListOfKeysResponse(BaseModel): | ||
| data: ListOfKeysResponse | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is seems wrong. It looks like double nested data, but in reality, it should be just one level of data.
https://docs.apify.com/api/v2/key-value-store-keys-get
This PR introduces fully typed API clients, with models generated directly from OpenAPI specifications.
Description
pyproject.tomland theMakefile.apify/apify-docsfor details - TODO.apify/apify-sdk-pythonfor details - chore: Adapt to apify-client v3 [WIP] apify-sdk-python#719.Issues
Testing