Use an enum for configurable_alternatives to make the generated json schema nicer #11350
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎ 1 Ignored Deployment
|
| arbitrary_types_allowed = True | ||
|
|
||
| include = include or [] | ||
| include = [i for i in include if i != "configurable"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
could we make it possible to generate schema that does not include "configurable" schema?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
how is that useful?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
opt in to expose configuration params twice seems overkill no?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- either we do that or that key is treated differently from other top level keys of the RunnableConfig (which is ifne)
- Any situations where a server picks up an existing configurable runnable without knowing that it's configurable and not wanting to expose configurability by default?
| which_enum = enum.StrEnum( # type: ignore[misc] | ||
| self.which.name, list(self.alternatives.keys()) + ["default"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we worry about this note from the docs on StrEnum?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's fine, we only check these values in this component
| alt_keys = self.alternatives.keys() | ||
| which_keys = tuple(Literal[k] for k in alt_keys) + ( # type: ignore | ||
| Literal["default"], | ||
| which_enum = enum.StrEnum( # type: ignore[misc] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Our of curiosity, what is the error this is suppressing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pylance/mypy doesn't like a non-constant value being passed in as the name of the enum, but from checking the code this doesnt raise an issue
| arbitrary_types_allowed = True | ||
|
|
||
| include = include or [] | ||
| include = [i for i in include if i != "configurable"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- either we do that or that key is treated differently from other top level keys of the RunnableConfig (which is ifne)
- Any situations where a server picks up an existing configurable runnable without knowing that it's configurable and not wanting to expose configurability by default?
No description provided.