Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

🐛 Add missing ValidationException.__str__ functionality #12972

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Closed
tamird wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

🐛 Add missing ValidationException.__str__ functionality #12972

tamird wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

@tamird
Copy link
Contributor

@tamird tamird commented Nov 22, 2024 •
edited by YuriiMotov
Loading

Fixes #12125.

UPD YuriiMotov:
The issue is: the code example in docs should show text version

1 validation error
path -> item_id
value is not a valid integer (type=type_error.integer)

But it shows JSON

[{'type': 'int_parsing', 'loc': ('path', 'item_id'), 'msg': 'Input should be a valid integer, unable to parse string as an integer', 'input': 'foo'}]

@tamird tamird mentioned this pull request Nov 22, 2024
Closed
@tamird tamird force-pushed the fix-repr branch 2 times, most recently from b3688e5 to 63b755a Compare November 22, 2024 17:32
svlandeg

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view

@svlandeg svlandeg changed the title Add missing RequestValidationError.__str__ 🐛 Add missing RequestValidationError.__str__ functionality Nov 25, 2024
@svlandeg svlandeg added the bug Something isn't working label Nov 25, 2024
@tamird

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view
@tamird

This comment was marked as off-topic.

Sign in to view
@tamird
Copy link
Contributor Author

tamird commented Dec 16, 2024

@alejsdev could you please take a look? This is relatively trivial and contains a test as requested by @svlandeg.

tamird
tamird commented Dec 16, 2024
View reviewed changes
@svlandeg svlandeg marked this pull request as draft December 17, 2024 13:00
@tamird tamird marked this pull request as ready for review December 17, 2024 15:10
@tamird
Copy link
Contributor Author

tamird commented Jan 13, 2025

Hello! This is ready for review.

@tiangolo
Copy link
Member

tiangolo commented Feb 20, 2025

@tamird there's no need to tag individual people nor to keep posting comments.

Your aggressive and demeaning attitude and comments towards others here are not well received and are not appreciated.

This is open source, MIT licensed, free. The result of any work from others here is received by you and/or your employer for free. Neither you nor your employer (it seems Google, from your GitHub) are paying anything to receive this open source project or our work for free. You actually have no particular right to demand reviews, merges, timelines, etc.

I request that you abstain from adding unrequested comments, in particular tagging others or with the only intention of pressing us to give a higher priority to reviewing your PRs, handling your needs, or reporting a status on the process of handling them. In particular, I request you to abstain from making any comment that could be in any way interpreted as demeaning towards others.

@tamird
Copy link
Contributor Author

tamird commented Feb 20, 2025

@tiangolo your points are well taken. The last comment here was 5 weeks ago.

YuriiMotov

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view

@tamird

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view
@tamird tamird requested a review from YuriiMotov July 23, 2025 14:46
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the waiting label Jul 23, 2025
YuriiMotov

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view

@tamird tamird force-pushed the fix-repr branch 2 times, most recently from bc0ca50 to f3f3cdd Compare October 13, 2025 13:24
@YuriiMotov YuriiMotov self-assigned this Oct 14, 2025
@YuriiMotov YuriiMotov self-requested a review October 14, 2025 16:48
@github-actions

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view
@github-actions github-actions bot added the conflicts Automatically generated when a PR has a merge conflict label Oct 20, 2025
@YuriiMotov YuriiMotov mentioned this pull request Nov 28, 2025
Closed
@YuriiMotov
Copy link
Member

YuriiMotov commented Dec 1, 2025

Looks like it's not so easy now as we run tests on Python 3.12 and Pydantic V1 is not supported there..

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the conflicts Automatically generated when a PR has a merge conflict label Dec 1, 2025
@tamird tamird force-pushed the fix-repr branch 3 times, most recently from 3618d12 to c38f95b Compare December 1, 2025 15:10
@tamird
Copy link
Contributor Author

tamird commented Dec 1, 2025

Looks like it's not so easy now as we run tests on Python 3.12 and Pydantic V1 is not supported there..

Just needed a little copy & paste.

@YuriiMotov
Copy link
Member

YuriiMotov commented Dec 1, 2025 •
edited
Loading

@tamird, thanks for resolving the merge conflict!

If I recall correctly, previously we switched to using existing ErrorDict and display_errors (import them from pydantic.v1) for simplicity. But now it turned out we can't just use them and have to duplicate that code.
Would it simplify the code if we switch back to just using our own implementations?

@tamird
Copy link
Contributor Author

tamird commented Dec 1, 2025

@tamird, thanks for resolving the merge conflict!

If I recall correctly, previously we switched to using existing ErrorDict and display_errors (import them from pydantic.v1) for simplicity. But now it turned out we can't just use them and have to duplicate that code. Would it simplify the code if we switch back to just using our own implementations?

Sure, it would probably be simpler. However this PR has now been open for over a year, and there's no indication that there's a desire to merge it. I hope you understand that I'm reluctant to invest further effort at this time without some indication that it will be accepted (or rejected).

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Dec 6, 2025

This pull request has a merge conflict that needs to be resolved.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the conflicts Automatically generated when a PR has a merge conflict label Dec 6, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the conflicts Automatically generated when a PR has a merge conflict label Dec 6, 2025
@tamird tamird changed the title 🐛 Add missing RequestValidationError.__str__ functionality 🐛 Add missing ValidationException.__str__ functionality Dec 6, 2025
@tamird tamird force-pushed the fix-repr branch 3 times, most recently from dcf6ada to 2785920 Compare December 6, 2025 14:46
@github-actions github-actions bot added the conflicts Automatically generated when a PR has a merge conflict label Dec 10, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Dec 10, 2025

This pull request has a merge conflict that needs to be resolved.

@tamird tamird closed this Dec 10, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@svlandeg svlandeg svlandeg left review comments

@YuriiMotov YuriiMotov Awaiting requested review from YuriiMotov

Assignees

@YuriiMotov YuriiMotov

Labels

bug Something isn't working conflicts Automatically generated when a PR has a merge conflict

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@tamird @tiangolo @YuriiMotov @svlandeg