Skip to content
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

feat(python): formally allow dicts to be passed in lieu of structs #3683

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 27, 2022

Conversation

RomainMuller
Copy link
Contributor

Formalize the contract that it is allowed to pass a dict in places where
a struct instance is expected (this provides less type checking guarantees,
and the developer is responsible for passing the right keys in).

This should address a false-positive issue with the runtime type-checking
introduced in 1.63.0 (#3660).


By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

@mergify mergify bot added the contribution/core This is a PR that came from AWS. label Jul 27, 2022
Formalize the contract that it is allowed to pass a dict in places where
a struct instance is expected (this provides less type checking guarantees,
and the developer is responsible for passing the right keys in).

This should address a false-positive issue with the runtime type-checking
introduced in 1.63.0 (#3660).
@RomainMuller RomainMuller force-pushed the rmuller/python-struct-as-dict branch from 8c9df43 to fa87557 Compare July 27, 2022 15:01
@RomainMuller RomainMuller self-assigned this Jul 27, 2022
@RomainMuller RomainMuller requested a review from a team July 27, 2022 15:03
@RomainMuller RomainMuller merged commit 1a5ac9d into main Jul 27, 2022
@RomainMuller RomainMuller deleted the rmuller/python-struct-as-dict branch July 27, 2022 16:37
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
contribution/core This is a PR that came from AWS.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants