🐛 Fix support for Annotated fields with Pydantic 2.12+

[stickM4N]

After pydantic update to support Python 3.14, different declaration syntax were affected by the changed.
I check and on pydantic side there is not changes on the resulting FieldInfo structure, at least at first glance.
In the tests I illustrated the 3 possible declaration syntax for annotations defined by pydantic and supported so far by sqlmodel. Two of them do not work any more with pydantic>=2.12!

[stickM4N]

solves #1602

[wguilen]

Any idea on when a new release with this fix will be available?

[stickM4N]

Any idea on when a new release with this fix will be available?

Not really, hopefully soon!
I would still recommend to use pydantic<2.12 if python 3.14 is not required... there have been big changes recently that could have included some malfunctions like this

[wguilen]

Any idea on when a new release with this fix will be available?

Not really, hopefully soon! I would still recommend to use pydantic<2.12 if python 3.14 is not required... there have been big changes recently that could have included some malfunctions like this

That's alright, I'll follow your suggestion. Thanks for the quick reply!

[svlandeg]

Hi @stickM4N, thanks for the PR! I'm going to push some changes to your branch directly, to include also the tests from #1602 and to get the PR in a good state to merge. I'll put it in draft while I work on it.

[stickM4N]

Hi @stickM4N, thanks for the PR! I'm going to push some changes to your branch directly, to include also the tests from #1602 and to get the PR in a good state to merge. I'll put it in draft while I work on it.

Perfect, feel free to do it!
It will be nice for this to me merged soon.

[svlandeg]

Thanks for the work on this, @stickM4N!

This now looks good to merge to me. I've added in the tests from #1602 just for good measure, and refactored the code a bit using Yurii's suggestions. I think it's much easier to follow/maintain like this, without the continue & break statements.

Will yet run this by Tiangolo for a final review.
Note that another alternative to this PR is #1607 - if we decide to merge this, we can close the other one.