inmanta / inmanta/std

JinjaProxy should use StrictUndefined

Open
#606 0 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

bug
Dominant language
Python
Stars
0
Forks
6
Avg merge
12h 25m
Merged PRs (30d)
5

Description

JinjaProxy returns Jinja's Undefined when core raises an OptionalValueException or an UnsetException. From the Jinja docs I suspect StrictUndefined may be more appropriate, though there could be backwards compatibility concerns. This should be investigated (don't take the premise for granted, I haven't gone in depth).

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start at the JinjaProxy entry point and trace how OptionalValueException and UnsetException become Jinja Undefined values. Compare that behavior with Jinja's StrictUndefined documentation, then inspect any existing tests covering these exceptions and determine whether the change would break compatibility; done means a documented decision backed by tests.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
python
Domain
backend
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
4/5
Estimated time
3-5 days
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
35/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.