softwaremill / softwaremill/tapir
Tapir Schema for Tuples is an SProduct instead of an array
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Scala
- Stars
- 1.5k
- Forks
- 468
- Avg merge
- 5h 37m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 34
Description
Currently a Schema for Tuple2 renders like a case class, with product members _1 and _2:
implicitly[Schema[(Int, Int)]]
Schema(
SProduct(
List(
SProductField(FieldName(_1,_1),Schema(SInteger(),None,false,None,None,Some(int32),None,false,false,All(List()),AttributeMap(Map()))),
SProductField(FieldName(_2,_2),Schema(SInteger(),None,false,None,None,Some(int32),None,false,false,All(List()),AttributeMap(Map())))
)
),
Some(SName(scala.Tuple2,List(Int, Int))),
false,None,None,None,None,false,false,All(List()),AttributeMap(Map())
)
Arguably, a Schema for TupleN as an array is a better choice, as done by circe:
println(implicitly[io.circe.Encoder[(Int, Int)]].apply(1 -> 2).noSpaces)
[1,2]
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start from the implicit Schema[(Int, Int)] entry point shown in the issue and trace how TupleN schemas currently become SProduct values. Compare the desired representation with the circe Encoder example, then determine the intended tuple-array behavior and add regression coverage for the resulting schema.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- scala
- Domain
- api
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 30/100