Dyanmic pydantic models
Project description
dynapydantic
dynapydantic is an extension to the pydantic Python
package that allow for dynamic tracking of pydantic.BaseModel subclasses.
Installation
This project can be installed via PyPI:
pip install dynapydantic
or with conda via the conda-forge channel:
conda install dynapydantic
Motiviation
Consider the following simple class setup:
import pydantic
class Base(pydantic.BaseModel):
pass
class A(Base):
field: int
class B(Base):
field: str
class Model(pydantic.BaseModel):
val: Base
As expected, we can use A's and B's for Model.val:
>>> m = Model(val=A(field=1))
>>> m
Model(val=A(field=1))
However, we quickly run into trouble when serializing and validating:
>>> m.model_dump()
{'base': {}}
>>> m.model_dump(serialize_as_any=True)
{'val': {'field': 1}}
>>> Model.model_validate(m.model_dump(serialize_as_any=True))
Model(val=Base())
Pydantic provides a solution for serialization via serialize_as_any (and
its corresponding field annotation SerializeAsAny), but offers no native
solution for the validation half. Currently, the canonical way of doing this
is to annotate the field as a union of all subclasses. Often, a single field
in the model is chosen as the "discriminator" in a
discriminated union.
The discriminated pattern is the most robust way to do this, as it eliminates
ambiguity between the union members. This library, dynapydantic, automates
this process.
Let's reframe the above problem with dynapydantic:
import dynapydantic
import pydantic
class Base(
dynapydantic.SubclassTrackingModel,
discriminator_field="name",
discriminator_value_generator=lambda t: t.__name__,
):
pass
class A(Base):
field: int
class B(Base):
field: str
class Model(pydantic.BaseModel):
val: dynapydantic.Polymorphic[Base]
Now, the same set of operations works as intended:
>>> m = Model(val=A(field=1))
>>> m
Model(val=A(field=1, name='A'))
>>> m.model_dump()
{'val': {'field': 1, 'name': 'A'}}
>>> Model.model_validate(m.model_dump())
Model(val=A(field=1, name='A')
How it works
TrackingGroup
The core entity in this library is the dynapydantic.TrackingGroup:
import typing as ty
import dynapydantic
import pydantic
mygroup = dynapydantic.TrackingGroup(
name="mygroup",
discriminator_field="name"
)
@mygroup.register("A")
class A(pydantic.BaseModel):
"""A class to be tracked, will be tracked as "A"."""
a: int
@mygroup.register()
class B(pydantic.BaseModel):
"""Another class, will be tracked as "B"."""
name: ty.Literal["B"] = "B"
a: int
class Model(pydantic.BaseModel):
"""A model that can have A or B"""
field: mygroup.union() # call after all subclasses have been registered
print(Model(field={"name": "A", "a": 4})) # field=A(a=4, name='A')
print(Model(field={"name": "B", "a": 5})) # field=B(name='B', a=5)
The union() method produces a discriminated union
of all registered pydantic.BaseModel subclasses. It also accepts an
plain=True keyword argument to produce a plain UnionType for use
in type annotations, but since this is a runtime-computed union, this will not
work with static type checkers. This union is based on a discriminator field,
which was configured by the discriminator_field argument to TrackingGroup.
The field can be created by hand, as was shown with B, or dynapydantic
will inject it for you, as was shown with A.
TrackingGroup has a few opt-in features to make it more powerful and easier to use:
discriminator_value_generator: This parameter is a optional callback function that is called with each class that gets registered and produces a default value for the discriminator field. This allows the user to callregister()without a value for the discriminator. For example, passing:lambda cls: cls.__name__would use the name of the class as the discriminator value.plugin_entry_point: This parameter indicates todynapydanticthat there might be models to be discovered in other packages. Packages are discovered by the Python entrypoint mechanism. See thetests/exampledirectory for an example of how this works.
SubclassTrackingModel
The most common use case of this pattern is to automatically register subclasses
of a given pydantic.BaseModel. This is supported via the use of
dynapydantic.SubclassTrackingModel. For example:
import typing as ty
import dynapydantic
import pydantic
class Base(
dynapydantic.SubclassTrackingModel,
discriminator_field="name",
discriminator_value_generator=lambda cls: cls.__name__,
):
"""Base model, will track its subclasses"""
# The TrackingGroup can be specified here like model_config, or passed in
# kwargs of the class declaration, just like how model_config works with
# pydantic.BaseModel. If you do it like this, you have to give the tracking
# group a name, whereas using kwargs will generate the name for you.
# tracking_config: ty.ClassVar[dynapydantic.TrackingGroup] = dynapydantic.TrackingGroup(
# name="BaseSubclasses",
# discriminator_field="name",
# discriminator_value_generator=lambda cls: cls.__name__,
# )
class Intermediate(Base, exclude_from_union=True):
"""Subclasses can opt out of being tracked"""
class Derived1(Intermediate):
"""Non-direct descendants are registered"""
a: int
class Derived2(Intermediate):
"""You can override the value generator if desired"""
name: ty.Literal["Custom"] = "Custom"
a: int
print(Base.registered_subclasses())
# {'Derived1': <class '__main__.Derived1'>, 'Custom': <class '__main__.Derived2'>}
# if plugin_entry_point was specificed, load plugin packages
# Base.load_plugins()
class Model(pydantic.BaseModel):
"""A model that can have any registered Base subclass"""
field: dynapydantic.Polymorphic[Base]
print(Model(field={"name": "Derived1", "a": 4}))
# field=Derived1(a=4, name='Derived1')
print(Model(field={"name": "Custom", "a": 5}))
# field=Derived2(name='Custom', a=5)
It is important to note that the subclasses that are supported are those that
were defined prior to defining the model that uses dynapydantic.Polymorphic
(Model in the above example). If you declare additional subclasses afterwards,
you must call .model_rebuild(force=True) on the model that uses the subclass
union.
Alternative union methods
!!! warning "Caution"
`dynapydantic` does **NOT** test if your models have ambiguities in them.
This is up to **YOU**.
Non-discriminated unions should only be used when you can **PROVE** that all
possible subclasses will parse unambiguously. If there is ambiguity in the
models, you can get unexpected results. If plugins are used, it is highly
discouraged to use anything besides discriminated unions.
While the default discriminated union is the recommended and most robust
approach, it does require a field in the model to act as the discriminator. If
the full list of union members is known to the author ahead of time and can be
proven to be unambiguous from a validation perspective, then the discriminator
field can be omitted and a
"smart" or
"left_to_right"
union may be used. TrackingGroup and SubclassTrackingModel support these
modes as well via the union_mode argument:
import typing as ty
import dynapydantic
import pydantic
class Base(
dynapydantic.SubclassTrackingModel,
union_mode="smart",
):
"""dynapydantic.Polymorphic[Base] will be a "smart" A | B"""
class A(Base):
a: int
class B(Base):
b: int
class Model(pydantic.BaseModel):
field: dynapydantic.Polymorphic[Base]
print(Model(field={"b": 5}))
# field=B(b=5)
When are unions realized?
When using TrackingModel directly, there is only one option for when the union
is realized, which is the moment you call .union(). At this point, any classes
that have been registered will be present in the union. Registration of
additional classes after a call to .union() will not update the returned
union from a previous call, so it is important to consider order of operations.
When using SubclassTrackingModel, there are more options and each comes with
their own tradeoffs:
-
Immediately: When using
dynapydantic.Union[T], the union is realized immediately. This is the "most eager" option, but is also the most sensitive with order of operations. Type checkers will not understand this direct calls tounion(), butdynapydantic.Union[T]will resolved toT.Despite the tradeoff on sensitivity to order of operations, this option can be desireable for applications that inspect field annotations directly. This normally arises in user-implemented model reflection code and with
pydantic_settings. -
Model-construction time: Instead of eagerly realizing the union in the field annotation,
dynapydantic.Polymorphic[T](in its default ), configuration will defer the union realization slightly, into the schema generation step for the model. The difference between this and option 1 is subtle, but does have an effect with recursive models. Consider the following:import dynapydantic import pydantic class Base(dynapydantic.SubclassTrackingModel, union_mode="smart"): pass class A(Base, extra="forbid"): a: int class B(Base, extra="forbid"): other: dynapydantic.Polymorphic[Base] B(other={"other": {"other": {"a": 2}}}) # ValidationError (union only has A) B.model_rebuild(force=True) B(other={"other": {"other": {"a": 2}}}) # B(other=B(other=B(other=A(a=2))))
if we used
Union[Base], themodel_rebuild()call would do nothing, as the union had already been realized. To accomplish the same thing with eager unions, we would have to use a forward reference, like"BUnion"then calldynapydantic.union(Base)right before themodel_rebuild()calls.Similar to
dynapydantic.Union,dyanpydantic.Polymorphicis interpretable by the type checker, which will constrain fields to be of the base class type. -
Validation time: Finally, realization of the union can be deferred to validation time. This makes the union construction process more robust to order of operations. In this formulation, all subclasses must be registered before the use of the union in validation, rather than the declaration of a model using the union field. This reduces the previous example down to:
import dynapydantic import pydantic class Base( dynapydantic.SubclassTrackingModel, union_mode="smart", union_realization="validation", ): pass class A(Base, extra="forbid"): a: int class B(Base, extra="forbid"): other: dynapydantic.Polymorphic[Base] B(other={"other": {"other": {"a": 2}}}) # B(other=B(other=B(other=A(a=2))))
This option has the cleanest syntax, as not
model_rebuild()calls are needed, but does incur a runtime penalty for potentially multiple schema compilations and the need for a field validator function, whereas options 1 and 2 can produce static schema. Like option 2, the field is able to be interpreted by type checkers as the base class.
As alluded to in the example for validation-time unions, this behavior can be
controlled via the model class declaration and the field annotation. Subclasses
of SubclassTrackingModel can pass a union_realization keyword argument with
the value of "model-construction" (default) or "validation" (or their
corresponding UnionRealization enum values) to control the default behavior of
when dynapydantic.Polymorphic will realize the union. This default can be
overriden at the Polymorphic call site by passing a second argument:
class Model(pydantic.BaseModel):
field: dynapydantic.Polymorphic[Base, "validation"]
Project details
Download files
Download the file for your platform. If you're not sure which to choose, learn more about installing packages.
Source Distribution
Built Distribution
Filter files by name, interpreter, ABI, and platform.
If you're not sure about the file name format, learn more about wheel file names.
Copy a direct link to the current filters
File details
Details for the file dynapydantic-0.5.0.tar.gz.
File metadata
- Download URL: dynapydantic-0.5.0.tar.gz
- Upload date:
- Size: 175.0 kB
- Tags: Source
- Uploaded using Trusted Publishing? Yes
- Uploaded via: twine/6.1.0 CPython/3.13.13
File hashes
| Algorithm | Hash digest | |
|---|---|---|
| SHA256 |
a333a7b618dd9d0a659f26cefb54fcbcf883a47875a44e69cb68350258718dd9
|
|
| MD5 |
06b3c121969048a4546ea4697909d1b0
|
|
| BLAKE2b-256 |
36b1beefa32bc1e263afb271c817e29885a91d586b7b678c115eeaedfd00534d
|
Provenance
The following attestation bundles were made for dynapydantic-0.5.0.tar.gz:
Publisher:
ci.yml on psalvaggio/dynapydantic
-
Statement:
-
Statement type:
https://in-toto.io/Statement/v1 -
Predicate type:
https://docs.pypi.org/attestations/publish/v1 -
Subject name:
dynapydantic-0.5.0.tar.gz -
Subject digest:
a333a7b618dd9d0a659f26cefb54fcbcf883a47875a44e69cb68350258718dd9 - Sigstore transparency entry: 1391822232
- Sigstore integration time:
-
Permalink:
psalvaggio/dynapydantic@63069076462c96125a967fa75ca99985c2bab0c2 -
Branch / Tag:
refs/tags/v0.5.0 - Owner: https://github.com/psalvaggio
-
Access:
public
-
Token Issuer:
https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com -
Runner Environment:
github-hosted -
Publication workflow:
ci.yml@63069076462c96125a967fa75ca99985c2bab0c2 -
Trigger Event:
release
-
Statement type:
File details
Details for the file dynapydantic-0.5.0-py3-none-any.whl.
File metadata
- Download URL: dynapydantic-0.5.0-py3-none-any.whl
- Upload date:
- Size: 18.2 kB
- Tags: Python 3
- Uploaded using Trusted Publishing? Yes
- Uploaded via: twine/6.1.0 CPython/3.13.13
File hashes
| Algorithm | Hash digest | |
|---|---|---|
| SHA256 |
911e1899f0daffeeab5e297d3fc381e4263ce776deda4db4bff1c29254bd9e97
|
|
| MD5 |
7f1dc387a8c21373141307df22bd2d40
|
|
| BLAKE2b-256 |
9b325914c6712a749045f0a2317b07eb5c6fdfa09b74cb30e87d21b5e91cafb4
|
Provenance
The following attestation bundles were made for dynapydantic-0.5.0-py3-none-any.whl:
Publisher:
ci.yml on psalvaggio/dynapydantic
-
Statement:
-
Statement type:
https://in-toto.io/Statement/v1 -
Predicate type:
https://docs.pypi.org/attestations/publish/v1 -
Subject name:
dynapydantic-0.5.0-py3-none-any.whl -
Subject digest:
911e1899f0daffeeab5e297d3fc381e4263ce776deda4db4bff1c29254bd9e97 - Sigstore transparency entry: 1391822237
- Sigstore integration time:
-
Permalink:
psalvaggio/dynapydantic@63069076462c96125a967fa75ca99985c2bab0c2 -
Branch / Tag:
refs/tags/v0.5.0 - Owner: https://github.com/psalvaggio
-
Access:
public
-
Token Issuer:
https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com -
Runner Environment:
github-hosted -
Publication workflow:
ci.yml@63069076462c96125a967fa75ca99985c2bab0c2 -
Trigger Event:
release
-
Statement type: