Update newest (no deep diff) #449
Conversation
|
Merging to
|
| print(proj) | ||
|
|
||
| print("------------\n1111111") | ||
| print(type(proj)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@InnocentBug Ludwig, if you have a moment do you mind telling me why this might load in a string?
also my work flow and logic in this test , is to ensure that I can save the node as just a "creation" step , and then be able to reload the node back in ( via using "load nodes from json") ,
then the idea to edit it , save it , then load it again ensuring the changes are indeed saved,
but the return value should be a node object right ? this is also what the function docs say and what I remember in my past work. I made this branch off of the current development and that function has not been touched by the changes in this PR so I'm a bit perplexed though its probably something simple , so I'm wondering what your thoughts are
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It does load a string if it thinks that it isn't a node.
(Or valid JSON)
| print(proj) | ||
|
|
||
| print("------------\n1111111") | ||
| print(type(proj)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It does load a string if it thinks that it isn't a node.
(Or valid JSON)
| proj_json = proj0.get_json().json | ||
| cript_api.save_new(proj0) | ||
|
|
||
| proj = cript.load_nodes_from_json(nodes_json=json.dumps(proj_json)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
also be careful here, if you load an existing project with the same UUID.
It will give you the same nodes as you have before.
You can't have different python nodes with the same UUID, except if you use the _use_cache argument of the load function.
… nodes and attributes and deeper nested objects
|
I just realized, that we may get a number of false positive I don't think that is an issue, but something to keep in mind, and maybe for optimization later. |
src/cript/api/api.py
Outdated
| data = new_node.get_json().json | ||
| response = self._capsule_request(url_path="/project/", method="POST", data=data) | ||
| print("----700----") | ||
| print(response.json()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey Ludwig
this is giving me the "bad uuid" for a project when I run "test inventory" (I mean when I run the whole test file, its seeming to give an issue on one of the integrations I'm a little unfamiliar with the work flow)
I get this out put
--------900---------
project
----700----
{'code': 400, 'data': None, 'error': 'Bad uuid: 9aa4b9e7-1b7c-4c76-9602-2c980bc4298a provided'}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That is probably the same issue that we discussed before.
The API requires all materials to be known before an inventory can be saved.
But in our tests, we have inventories with new materials in them.
So, you get a bad UUID, when you try to save one.
We will have to redesign the fixtures, such that they contain known materials.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
for now, we can ignore it, I guess.
Or better, change the inventories, such that they contain no or known materials.
But we also have to think about the user, parse this error, and give a good error message, when this happens.
src/cript/api/api.py
Outdated
| print(_no_condense_uuid) | ||
| def _internal_save(self, new_node: PrimaryBaseNode, preknown_uid: str, _no_condense_uuid: bool) -> None: | ||
| """ | ||
| NOTE: for Ludwig |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ludwig , this is still Work In Progress, I think I fleshed out most of the skeleton but where to put and use the "uid map" is causing me to scratch my head a bit. I left a pretty detailed note in the docstring here. do you mind taking a a glance at it ? (the note?) and let me know your thoughts?
Description
Changes
Known Issues
Notes
Checklist
CONTRIBUTORS.md) in the pull request source branch.