Schemathesis
pydantic
Schemathesis | pydantic | |
---|---|---|
23 | 167 | |
2,091 | 18,617 | |
1.6% | 2.1% | |
9.7 | 9.8 | |
10 days ago | 7 days ago | |
Python | Python | |
MIT License | MIT License |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
Schemathesis
-
Ask HN: Any Good Fuzzer for gRPC?
I am not aware of any tools like that, but eventually, I plan to add support for gRPC fuzzing to Schemathesis. There were already some discussions and it is more or less clear how to move forward. See https://github.com/schemathesis/schemathesis/discussions/190...
-
Show HN: Auto-generate load tests/synthetic test data from OpenAPI spec/HAR file
Why is AI needed for this at all? Have you heard about Schemathesis (https://github.com/schemathesis/schemathesis)?
-
A Tale of Two Kitchens - Hypermodernizing Your Python Code Base
SchemaThesis is a powerful tool, especially when working with web APIs, and here's how it can enhance your testing capabilities:
- Hurl 4.0.0
-
OpenAPI v4 Proposal
I'm sorry, but you have completely misunderstood the purpose of Open API.
It is not a specification to define your business logic classes and objects -- either client or server side. Its goal is to define the interface of an API, and to provide a single source of truth that requests and responses can be validated against. It contains everything you need to know to make requests to an API; code generation is nice to have (and I use it myself, but mainly on the server side, for routing and validation), but not something required or expected from OpenAPI
For what it's worth, my personal preferred workflow to build an API is as follows:
1. Build the OpenAPI spec first. A smaller spec could easily be done by hand, but I prefer using a design tool like Stoplight [0]; it has the best Web-based OpenAPI (and JSON Schema) editor I have encountered, and integrates with git nearly flawlessly.
2. Use an automated tool to generate the API code implementation. Again, a static generation tool such as datamodel-code-generator [1] (which generates Pydantic models) would suffice, but for Python I prefer the dynamic request routing and validation provided by pyapi-server [2].
3. Finally, I use automated testing tools such as schemathesis [3] to test the implementation against the specification.
[0] https://stoplight.io/
[1] https://koxudaxi.github.io/datamodel-code-generator/
[2] https://pyapi-server.readthedocs.io
[3] https://schemathesis.readthedocs.io
-
Faster time-to-market with API-first
Consolidating the API specification with OpenAPI was a turning point for the project. From that moment we were able to run mock servers to build and test the UI before integrating with the backend, and we were able to validate the backend implementation against the specification. We used prism to run mock servers, and Dredd to validate the server implementation (these days I’d rather use schemathesis).
- Show HN: Step CI – API Testing and Monitoring Made Simple
-
API-first development maturity framework
In this approach, you produce an API specification first, then you build the API against the specification, and then you validate your implementation against the specification using automated API testing tools. This is the most reliable approach for building API servers, since it’s the only one that holds the server accountable and validates the implementation against the source of truth. Unfortunately, this approach isn’t as common as it should be. One of the reasons why it isn’t so common is because it requires you to produce the API specification first, which, as we saw earlier, puts off many developers who don’t know how to work with OpenAPI. However, like I said before, generating OpenAPI specifications doesn’t need to be painful since you can use tools for that. In this approach, you use automated API testing tools to validate your implementation. Tools like Dredd and schemathesis. These tools work by parsing your API specification and automatically generating tests that ensure your implementation complies with the specification. They look at every aspect of your API implementation, including use of headers, status codes, compliance with schemas, and so on. The most advanced of these tools at the moment is schemathesis, which I highly encourage you to check out.
-
How do you manage microservices API versions and branching strategies?
Keep all API versions in the code Another strategy is to have all the different API versions in the same code. So you may have a folder structure that looks like this: api ├── v1 └── v2 Within the API folder, you have one folder for v1 and another one for v2. Each folder has its own schemas and routes as required by the API version they implement. If you use URL-based versioning, v1 is accessible through the example.com/v1 endpoint or the v1.example.com subdomain (whichever strategy you use), and same for v2. Deprecating a version is a simple as its corresponding folder. In any case, I'd recommend you also validate your API implementations in the CI using something like schemathesis. Schemathesis looks at the API documentation and automatically generates hundreds of tests to make sure you're using the right schemas, status codes, and so on. It works best if you design and document the API before implementing, which allows you to include OpenAPI links and other features.
-
This Week in Python
schemathesis – Run generated test scenarios based on your OpenAPI specification
pydantic
-
Advanced RAG with guided generation
First, note the method prefix_allowed_tokens_fn. This method applies a Pydantic model to constrain/guide how the LLM generates tokens. Next, see how that constrain can be applied to txtai's LLM pipeline.
-
utype VS pydantic - a user suggested alternative
2 projects | 15 Feb 2024
utype is a concise alternative of pydantic with simplified parameters and usages, supporting both sync/async functions and generators parsing, and capable of using native logic operators to define logical types like AND/OR/NOT, also provides custom type parsing by register mechanism that supports libraries like pydantic, attrs and dataclasses
- Pydantic v2 ruined the elegance of Pydantic v1
-
Ask HN: Pydantic has too much deprecation. Why is it popular?
I like some of the changes from v1 to v2. But then you have something like this [0] removed from the library without proper documentation or replacement, resulting in ugly workarounds in the link that wont' work properly.
[0]: https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/discussions/6337
- OpenAI uses Pydantic for their ChatCompletions API
-
🍹GinAI - Cocktails mixed with generative AI
The easiest implementation I found was to use a PyDantic class for my target schema — and use that as a parameter for the method call to “ChatCompletion.create()”. Here’s a fragment of the GinAI Python classes used.
-
FastStream: Python's framework for Efficient Message Queue Handling
Also, FastStream uses Pydantic to parse input JSON-encoded data into Python objects, making it easy to work with structured data in your applications, so you can serialize your input messages just using type annotations.
-
Introducing FastStream: the easiest way to write microservices for Apache Kafka and RabbitMQ in Python
Pydantic Validation: Leverage Pydantic's validation capabilities to serialize and validate incoming messages
-
Cannot get Langchain to work
Not sure if it is exactly related, but there is an open issue on Github for that exact message.
-
FastAPI 0.100.0:Release Notes
Well the performance increase is so huge because pydantic1 is really really slow. And for using rust, I'd have expected more tbh…
I've been benchmarking pydantic v2 against typedload (which I write) and despite the rust, it still manages to be slower than pure python in some benchmarks.
The ones on the website are still about comparing to v1 because v2 was not out yet at the time of the last release.
pydantic's author will refuse to benchmark any library that is faster (https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/pull/3264 https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/pull/1525 https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/pull/1810) and keep boasting about amazing performances.
On pypy, v2 beta was really really really slow.
What are some alternatives?
dredd - Language-agnostic HTTP API Testing Tool
Cerberus - Lightweight, extensible data validation library for Python
Robot Framework - Generic automation framework for acceptance testing and RPA
nexe - 🎉 create a single executable out of your node.js apps
pytest - The pytest framework makes it easy to write small tests, yet scales to support complex functional testing
msgspec - A fast serialization and validation library, with builtin support for JSON, MessagePack, YAML, and TOML
coverage
SQLAlchemy - The Database Toolkit for Python
drf-openapi-tester - Test utility for validating OpenAPI documentation
sqlmodel - SQL databases in Python, designed for simplicity, compatibility, and robustness.
tox - Command line driven CI frontend and development task automation tool.
mypy - Optional static typing for Python