Resolved issue with validation running multiple times for nested serializers; minor usage improvement #174
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
auvipy
suggested changes
Nov 21, 2022
|
@auvipy Yes, will do it later |
… for one to one fields
…tead of field_name
…e instead of replacing
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Resolved issue with validation running multiple times for nested serializers by using
fast_to_internal_valueinstead of callingis_valid. All serializers that are nested must useNestedOnlySerializerMixinin order to be able to save the changes to object. If nested serializer has other nested serializers, it should use bothNestedOnlySerializerMixinandBaseNestedModelSerializer.Minor usage improvement for
update_or_create_reverse_relations: if field isOneToOneFieldthen pk will be retrieved automatically and does not need to be specified when making a request.The changes potentially can lead to incompatibility with newer DRF versions as serializer's
savemethod is overwritten completely.Let me know of any improvements that should be made.