Skip to content

Conversation

@mhkarimi1383
Copy link

@mhkarimi1383 mhkarimi1383 commented Sep 9, 2024

Hi

Sometimes there is a need of decoding entire value as an json object (useful when some params are too dynamic or getting that option in a prompt). I wanted to also add pydantic support (for both single option as json and all of the options in a single model) there and also use orjson (by checking if that's installed as an optional dependency), If that's Ok.

@svlandeg svlandeg added the feature New feature, enhancement or request label Sep 10, 2024
@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

Signed-off-by: Muhammed Hussein Karimi <[email protected]>
@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

Signed-off-by: Muhammed Hussein Karimi <[email protected]>
@mhkarimi1383 mhkarimi1383 changed the title ✨ feat: json and bytes field suppport in options ✨ feat: json and bytes field support in options Sep 10, 2024
@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

Signed-off-by: Muhammed Hussein Karimi <[email protected]>
@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

@mhkarimi1383
Copy link
Author

@svlandeg it's ok to ignore coverage on newly created class?

@svlandeg
Copy link
Member

No, in general we really need all the code in the main modules to be fully tested 🙏

@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

@mhkarimi1383
Copy link
Author

mhkarimi1383 commented Sep 17, 2024

@svlandeg

I have added tests for newly created class

coverage is 100% again :)

@mhkarimi1383
Copy link
Author

If changes are Ok so far I can work on Pydantic support, Or move Pydantic support in another PR?

@svlandeg

@svlandeg
Copy link
Member

HI @mhkarimi1383!

We haven't yet been able to review this PR in detail. When we do, we'll update here. No need to ping individual maintainers in the meantime 😉

In terms of adding more functionality, it's always best to open separate PRs for distinct functionality. It makes the review process much easier if one PR deals with one "atomic" change.

Do have a look at existing PRs - if I recall correctly there's already a few PRs open with proposals for Pydantic support.

@svlandeg svlandeg self-assigned this Oct 23, 2024
@svlandeg
Copy link
Member

svlandeg commented Jan 8, 2025

Thanks again for this PR @mhkarimi1383! I'm going to start reviewing it in detail and will push some changes directly to your branch as I'm working on this. I'll put this PR in draft while I do so.

@svlandeg svlandeg marked this pull request as draft January 8, 2025 15:19
@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

@svlandeg svlandeg changed the title ✨ Support json and bytes parameter types ✨ Support json (dict) as parameter type Nov 25, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Nov 25, 2025

@mhkarimi1383
Copy link
Author

I have updated the description to not include bytes support

@github-actions github-actions bot added the conflicts Automatically generated when a PR has a merge conflict label Dec 19, 2025
@github-actions

This comment was marked as resolved.

@github-actions github-actions bot added conflicts Automatically generated when a PR has a merge conflict and removed conflicts Automatically generated when a PR has a merge conflict labels Dec 21, 2025
@github-actions

This comment was marked as resolved.

@mhkarimi1383
Copy link
Author

@svlandeg if this will not get merged I will close it...

@svlandeg svlandeg self-assigned this Jan 7, 2026
@svlandeg svlandeg marked this pull request as draft January 7, 2026 14:17
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the conflicts Automatically generated when a PR has a merge conflict label Jan 9, 2026
@svlandeg svlandeg removed their assignment Jan 9, 2026
@svlandeg svlandeg marked this pull request as ready for review January 9, 2026 15:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

feature New feature, enhancement or request

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants