What's the diference between 'normal' Python Classes and Pydantic Classes? - python

I would like to know the difference between classes built normally in python and those built with the Pydantic lib, for example:
eg normal;
class Node:
def __init__(self, chave=None, esquerda=None, direita=None):
self.chave = chave
self.esquerda = esquerda
self.direita = direita
eg pydantic;
from datetime import datetime
from typing import List, Optional
from pydantic import BaseModel
class User(BaseModel):
id: int
name = 'John Doe'
signup_ts: Optional[datetime] = None
friends: List[int] = []

There are a few main differences.
Firstly, purpose. Pydantic models are designed to:
Data validation and settings management using python type annotations.
pydantic enforces type hints at runtime, and provides user friendly errors when data is invalid.
When you use type annotations you receive a lot of validators and some useful methods out of the box.
As Ahmed and John says, in your example you can't assign “hello” to id in BaseModel (pydantic) because you type id as an int. But you can pass a string “1” (must be a numerical, not float) and it will be mapped to int. In this case:
pydantic uses int(v) to coerce types to an int; see this warning on loss of information during data conversion
Also Pydantic models allows you to use many more types than standard python types, like urls and much more. It means that you can easily validate more data types.
You can easily create complex models using composition.
Pydantic has some kind of integration with orms: docs
There are a lot of other features, much more than I can describe in a single answer. I strongly recommend reading the documentation, it is very clear and useful.
The pydantic models are very useful for example in building microservices where you can share your interfaces as pydantic models. Also all models can easily generate the json schema. See: Schema, exporting models.
Pydantic is also a big part of a growing in popularity python web framework fastapi.

Related

What is the point of using `MISSING` in hydra or pydantic?

I am creating a configuration management system in python and are exploring options between hydra/pydantic/both. I get a little confused over when to use MISSING versus just leaving it blank/optional. I will use an example of OmegaConf here since
the underlying structure of hydra uses it.
#dataclass
class User:
# A simple user class with two missing fields
name: str = MISSING
height: Height = MISSING
where it says that this MISSING field will convert to yaml's ??? equivalent. Can I just leave it blank?

Pydantic schema logic

So, I'm building an API to interact with my personal wine labels collections database.
For what I understand, a pydantic model purpose is to serve as a "verifier" of the schema that is sent to the API. So, my pydantic schema for adding a label is the following:
from pydantic import BaseModel
from typing import Optional
class WineLabels(BaseModel):
name: Optional[str]
type: Optional[str]
year = Optional[int]
grapes = Optional[str]
country = Optional[str]
region = Optional[str]
price = Optional[float]
id = Optional[str]
None of the fields is to be updated automatically. This is equal to the sqlalchemy model since I want to add all the fields manually.
So my question is, let's say I want to create a call to search by ID and another one to search by name. I do not believe these schema should be applied. Should I create another schema ? Should I create one like this?:
class SearchWineLabel(WineLabels):
id: str
Should a schema be created for each purpose that cannot be fulfilled by an already existing schema?
Sorry, but I can't understand the logic behind it.
Thanks!!
If you want to search by id or name, I'm not sure if you even need a schema - one or more get parameters would usually be enough in those cases (and is usually better semantically).
In any case, the schema would be written for what the endpoint is expected to receive, not by using a general schema that contains the field in some other way. Think of the schemas as the input/output definitions for given resources and endpoints.
You usually want to have different schemas for adding and updating (since adding will require certain fields to be present, while updating may allow null or a missing field in any location).
The Pydantic schemas will allow you to express these differences without writing code, and it will be reflected in your generated api docs under /docs

Dictionary vs Marshmallow dataclass schemas for webargs

The webargs module allows to describe argument schemas as a pure dictionary or marshmallow dataclass schema:
# Dictionary variant
#use_args({'field1': field.Int(required=True, validate=validate.Range(min=1))}, location='json')
def post(args: Dict[str, any]):
controller.post(args)
# Marshmallow dataclass schema
#dataclass()
class Arg:
field1: int = field(metadata=dict(required=True, validate=validate.Range(min=1)))
#use_args(Arg.Schema(), location='json')
def post(arg: Arg):
controller.post(arg)
The first variant looks shorter and faster but we lose syntax highlight and type checks in IDE (cuz it's dict) and also it leads to longer calls, i.e. args['field1'] instead of arg.field1.
Which variant do you use in your big projects? Are there some best practices when to use the first or second variant?
There is no best practice. It is a matter of preference, really.
Sometimes, people think that a schema is too much code for just just one or two query args and a dict is enough.
I like to use schemas everywhere. I find it more consistent and it allows all schemas to derive from a base schema to inherit Meta parameters.
I don't use marshmallow dataclass, just pure marshmallow, so I always get a dict anyway.

"str" is not a dataclass error with marshmallow and marshmallow-dataclass

Using python, I am trying to create data schema for my dataclasses using marshmallow and marshmallow-dataclass. I believe I have followed the docs, adding the decorator to my relevant dataclasses and NewTypes to my fields that are not standard python objects. However, I am getting an error before the program even loads.
The error relates to a str not being a dataclass and I have no idea how the decorator is processing a string instead of a dataclass.
I am sure I have missed something simple, so apologies in advance if that is the case.
A summarised version of the code is:
from marshmallow_dataclass import dataclass as m_dataclass, NewType
ProjectileDataType = NewType("ProjectileDataType", Any)
#m_dataclass
class ProjectileData:
Schema: ClassVar[Type[Schema]] = Schema
# what created it?
skill_name: str = field(default="None")
# what does it look like?
sprite: str = field(default="None")
defintions.py : https://pastebin.com/tHnVE2Gc
Error traceback: https://pastebin.com/htuqhKSU
Docs: https://github.com/lovasoa/marshmallow_dataclass , https://marshmallow.readthedocs.io/en/stable/quickstart.html

What is Body? `from fastapi import Body`

In the documentation and elsewhere I have seen Body used but don't know what it is.
Can someone explain what these three options mean?
from fastapi import Body
from pydantic import BaseModel
class MyModel(BaseModel):
body1: None
body2: Body(None)
body3: Body(...)
When you use a Pydantic model you don't need to use Body.
You could write:
from pydantic import BaseModel, Schema
class MyModel(BaseModel):
body1: None
body2: Schema(None)
body3: Schema(...)
Body is used only in path operation parameters when you need to force FastAPI to understand that the parameter is received in as part of the body (e.g. instead of a query parameter). You only need to use Body explicitly when using parameters of "singular" types (of a single value, like int, str). If you use a Pydantic model, a list or something similar as a type, you don't need to use Body explicitly.
You can also use Body to add extra metadata if you need to. Like a title, examples, etc.
Read more about it here in the docs: https://fastapi.tiangolo.com/tutorial/body/

Categories