-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7.3k
[rust-axum] Add support for multiple response types and streaming responses #22095
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
Open
jacob-mink-1996
wants to merge
5
commits into
OpenAPITools:master
Choose a base branch
from
jacob-mink-1996:jmink/support-multiple-response-types
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
e95ced8
iterating on the appropriate types to return, creating test cases for…
jacob-mink-1996 4454b78
Updates on running integration tests - need to handle empty response …
jacob-mink-1996 37f3e75
Commit the changes to the generated rust code with the new feature
jacob-mink-1996 684fbba
If there is no stream content, ensure we derive Debug, Serialize, Des…
jacob-mink-1996 4645ebf
Update the samples from the new condition derive generation
jacob-mink-1996 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
@jacob-mink-1996
I think the PR is too big to review. How about support streaming responses only? Support multiple response type in another PR?
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.
It might only be large because of the integration tests changed - lots of response enums have new names to support e.g. a 200 with two different content types.
I don’t have time at the moment to dedicate toward splitting the change, and again, am still unfamiliar with the repository. I do not know what exists/does not exist that should be done beyond slapping down some unit test yaml :)
Perhaps this PR should be used as inspiration if you would like to implement one or both of those features in isolation?
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.
Hi @jacob-mink-1996
I’m also hoping to find some time this week or next to work on this feature. l will be pushing commits here and we can work together.
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.
Awesome @linxGnu. That makes me feel a lot better. I can wait until you get your hands dirty before I try to split the features if you still want that.
Just to point it out - the reason I went down the route of coupling these features was that introducing another Boolean check for isStream in the vendor features made things unwieldy - just using the list directly with checks seemed to clean things up, and then this followed naturally.