Anonymous swagger definitions generate subpar code

[tomasherman]

Hello!

Following swagger code:

swagger: '2.0'
paths:  
  /dummy:
    post:
      operationId: dummy
      responses:
        200:
          schema:
            type: object
            properties:
              foo:
                type: string
              bar:
                type: string

generate this code:

sealed abstract class DummyResponse {
  def fold[A](handleOk: io.circe.Json => A): A = this match {
    case x: DummyResponse.Ok =>
      handleOk(x.value)
  }
}
object DummyResponse { case class Ok(value: io.circe.Json) extends DummyResponse }

I think we can do better - thoughts? I will try to tackle this myself, just want to check if there is a good reason for the code above to be generated in such a shape, without strict definition

[sbrunk]

I think it just hasn't been implemented yet. As discussed in #424, the same is true for anonymous request body definitions.

Since anonymous objects can be nested, it could make sense to reuse some of the machinery for generating classes from nested definitions added in #356.

[tomasherman]

i see, for some reason i thought this should be supported as @hanny24 worked on it for some of our code but maybe he worked on something slightly different

[blast-hardcheese]

Need to circle back to confirm this is still an issue. There was a bit of work done to make nested anonymous structures work.

[tomasherman]

Hello. Thanks for getting back to this. To be honest, I'm not quite sure. I don't work on a project at that would use guardrail at work anymore so it would be difficult for me to find the time to test it. Considering that, we can probably close the issue.

[blast-hardcheese]

@tomasherman Considering your original issue message includes a way to reproduce, my comment was more of an intent for resolution for this issue.

I went back to categorize all open issues, this being one of them, so feel free to unsubscribe if it's too noisy, I'll do the assessment and investigation.

Thanks for your interest and contributions in the past, all the best for the future.

[tomasherman]

No worries, many teams still benefit from Guardrail here in Avast and it was a lifesafer when I personally needed it. I'm glad we had a chance to (hopefully) make it better