8000 Remove custom MRO implementation of Pydantic models by Viicos · Pull Request #11184 · pydantic/pydantic · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]

Skip to content

Remove custom MRO implementation of Pydantic models #11184

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 30, 2024
Merged

Conversation

Viicos
Copy link
Member
@Viicos Viicos commented Dec 27, 2024

This is no longer necessary since #10666 was introduced.

Fixes #11183.
Fixes #11042.
Closes #11037.

Change Summary

Related issue number

Checklist

  • The pull request title is a good summary of the changes - it will be used in the changelog
  • Unit tests for the changes exist
  • Tests pass on CI
  • Documentation reflects the changes where applicable
  • My PR is ready to review, please add a comment including the phrase "please review" to assign reviewers

This is no longer necessary since #10666
was introduced.
Copy link

Deploying pydantic-docs with  Cloudflare Pages  Cloudflare Pages

Latest commit: 6adc9c3
Status: ✅  Deploy successful!
Preview URL: https://6df86b72.pydantic-docs.pages.dev
Branch Preview URL: https://revert-mro.pydantic-docs.pages.dev

View logs

@github-actions github-actions bot added the relnotes-fix Used for bugfixes. label Dec 27, 2024
@Viicos
Copy link
Member Author
Viicos commented Dec 27, 2024

I believe this should be backported, as it fixes #11042 which was a regression.

@sydney-runkle
Copy link
Contributor

Generally, I approve of this approach, as discussed in #10666. I think that the less we can manipulate the MRO, the better, as it introduces a pretty complex internal pattern that's hard to maintain.

That being said, I think we should get buy in from @kc0506 and @dmontagu, as they were pretty involved in the addition of this custom MRO implementation.

Happy to do another patch 2.10 release with this fix, I've added the corresponding label.

Copy link
codspeed-hq bot commented Dec 27, 2024

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #11184 will not alter performance

Comparing revert-mro (6adc9c3) with main (fac2bfd)

Summary

✅ 46 untouched benchmarks

Copy link
Contributor

Coverage report

Click to see where and how coverage changed

FileStatementsMissingCoverageCoverage
(new stmts)
Lines missing
  pydantic/_internal
  _model_construction.py
Project Total  

This report was generated by python-coverage-comment-action

Copy link
Contributor
@sydney-runkle sydney-runkle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reviewed again, given that this is basically just a reversion, I think we can go ahead and merge.

@sydney-runkle sydney-runkle merged commit 54412ae into main Dec 30, 2024
58 checks passed
@sydney-runkle sydney-runkle deleted the revert-mro branch December 30, 2024 15:29
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
relnotes-fix Used for bugfixes.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Validation of parametrized generics issues Regression using regex_engine python-re in pydantic >= 2.10b1
2 participants
0