Shared parameters are dereferenced too late for use in code sample templates about widdershins HOT 6 CLOSED

@MikeRalphson The python template you made is working for GET requests, but the parameters aren't making it to any other requests.

from widdershins.

@bc-AlyssNoland the fix passed the test suite, so can you try it out from the repository version, or would you need a new version published to npm? With your example Python code template you are probably better off using the parameter.safeType pseudo-property as this normalises a few quirks.

from widdershins.

Hi @bc-AlyssNoland from that screenshot I can't quite see which post request is missing parameters. Could you let me have the /path ?

Edit: Is this because the template is using queryParameters, and the post requests only have body and path parameters? Does the python requests module know about replaceable path parameters, or is params only for queryString parameters?

I'm thinking about making the default code templates only list parameters which are in:query and required:true (using requiredParameters[]) to keep the size down. The option would still be there for all parameters to be listed in user templates by iterating through one of the other arrays.

from widdershins.

https://gist.github.com/bc-AlyssNoland/2f64aa9041a794f93712d8b4a6a4649a
https://gist.github.com/preciselyAlyss/2f64aa9041a794f93712d8b4a6a4649a

I posted the output of the file in the gist above. It seems some GET and DELETE requests are getting the parameters. I agree with only listing things that are required. We (my company) actually use an extension to indicate which fields are required by operation, but I can work on modifying a fork to accommodate that.

amount:
        type: number
        format: double
        description: |
          The value of the adjustment by the bulk pricing rule.
        x-required:
          - post
          - put
        minimum: 0

from widdershins.

@bc-AlyssNoland Thanks, will take a look at the gist.

You should be able to use the new template callback feature to flip the parameter.required value based on your vendor extension if you want to avoid forking in this case.

from widdershins.

@PreciselyAlyss I believe the underlying bug has been fixed and is in v1.1.0 - please feel free to re-open this issue if there is still something outstanding, or to raise a new one. Thanks.

from widdershins.