feat: problem details plugin #3323
Conversation
* feat: Added precedence of CLI parameters over envs * Update docs/usage/cli.rst Co-authored-by: Peter Schutt <peter.github@proton.me> * Remove redundant LitestarEnv fields and fix tests * Update docs/usage/cli.rst * Update litestar/cli/commands/core.py * Update docs/usage/cli.rst * Update docs/usage/cli.rst * Update litestar/cli/commands/core.py --------- Co-authored-by: kedod <kedod> Co-authored-by: Peter Schutt <peter.github@proton.me> Co-authored-by: Jacob Coffee <jacob@z7x.org>
…on from HTTPException
|
It looks like you are adding a new feature! 🚀 Please rebase and point your PR to the |
github-actions
bot
added
size: small
type/feat
area/plugins
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3323 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 98.28% 98.27% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 324 325 +1
Lines 14774 14830 +56
Branches 2344 2352 +8
==========================================
+ Hits 14520 14574 +54
- Misses 116 117 +1
- Partials 138 139 +1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
If `extra` is a `Mapping` then we'll merge that into the final problem details JSON to keep it similar to how it is in the RFC.
|
What is the status on this? |
At risk of stating the obvious, it looks like its waiting on some comments to be resolved and a rebase. |
I'll get it fixed in a few days. I've been a bit busy. |
guacs
force-pushed
the
problem-details-plugin
branch
from
74fabb5
to
c543cb9
Compare
Co-authored-by: Jacob Coffee <jacob@z7x.org>
|
Documentation preview will be available shortly at https://litestar-org.github.io/litestar-docs-preview/3323 |
guacs
force-pushed
the
problem-details-plugin
branch
from
69f34bd
to
6460f0a
Compare
github-actions
bot
added
the
area/docs
|
| problem_details.update(extra) | ||
| else: | ||
| problem_details["extra"] = extra | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Isn't there some strange redundancy in these conditionals?
Both L88 and L91 check if self.extra is a Mapping, meaning that if it is a Mapping, L92 will never happen. Right?
To me, it looks like L91-93 can be removed and L94 can be unindented one step to replace the whole interior conditional.
Description
A plugin to enable usage of problem details as the response.
The way this works is by injecting an exception handler into the app level exception handlers to convert
ProblemDetailsExceptioninto a response following the specification as per RFC 9457.Users can pass in a mapping of exception types to callables that will convert those exception types into
ProblemDetailsExceptionfor handling specific exceptions such as pydantic'sValidationError. That convertedProblemDetailsExceptionwill then be used to create the response. This should allow for flexibility when needed.Closes
Closes #3199.