Add model-level json_schema_extra support for Pydantic v2#2803
Add model-level json_schema_extra support for Pydantic v2#2803
Conversation
|
Warning Rate limit exceeded@koxudaxi has exceeded the limit for the number of commits that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 10 minutes and 15 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughAdds two CLI options, Changes
Sequence DiagramsequenceDiagram
participant User
participant CLI as CLI (args)
participant API as generate()
participant Config as Config
participant Parser as JsonSchemaParser
participant Extract as set_schema_extensions()
participant Template as extra_template_data
participant ModelGen as Pydantic v2 assembler
User->>CLI: pass --model-extra-keys x-custom-metadata
CLI->>API: include model_extra_keys param
API->>Config: build Config (model_extra_keys=...)
Config->>Parser: Parser.__init__(model_extra_keys=...)
Parser->>Parser: store self.model_extra_keys
Parser->>Extract: parse schema, call set_schema_extensions()
Extract->>Template: store matched keys as model_extras
Template->>ModelGen: supply extra_template_data (model_extras)
ModelGen->>ModelGen: merge model_extras into ConfigDict.json_schema_extra
ModelGen-->>User: output model with json_schema_extra
Estimated Code Review Effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes Possibly Related PRs
Suggested Labels
Suggested Reviewers
Poem
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
🤖 Generated by GitHub Actions
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
src/datamodel_code_generator/model/pydantic_v2/__init__.py (1)
9-9: ConfigDict json_schema_extra wiring looks correct; consider trimming newnoqacodes.The added
Dictimport andjson_schema_extra: Optional[Dict[str, Any]]field are the right way to surface model‑level extensions intoConfigDictfor Pydantic v2, and they align with howBaseModelnow buildsconfig_parameters["json_schema_extra"].Ruff is flagging the new
# noqa: UP035(line 9) and# noqa: UP006, UP045(line 47) as unused because those rules are currently disabled. To keep lint clean, it’s worth either:
- Dropping these
noqafragments on the new lines, or- Enabling the corresponding rules project‑wide if you still want them suppressed here.
Functionally everything looks good.
Also applies to: 47-47
src/datamodel_code_generator/model/pydantic_v2/base_model.py (1)
247-252: Model-level extras merge is correct; double‑check precedence and type assumptions.This block correctly pulls
model_extrasfromextra_template_dataand merges it intoconfig_parameters["json_schema_extra"], which is exactly what’s needed for the new--model-extra-keys*options.Two minor considerations:
Precedence:
{**existing, **model_extras}means values frommodel_extraswin on key collisions with any pre‑existingjson_schema_extracoming fromextra_template_data["config"]. If you ever introduce user‑suppliedjson_schema_extraviaextra_template_data, you may want the user config to override the schema‑derived extras instead, i.e.{**model_extras, **existing}.Type safety: This assumes that any existing
json_schema_extrais a dict‑like mapping. If in the future you support callables or other non‑mapping types there, a small guard likeif isinstance(existing, dict)before merging would keep this safe.Right now, for the current use cases, the implementation looks solid.
src/datamodel_code_generator/arguments.py (1)
627-639: CLI flags are well-defined; confirm grouping underfield_optionsis intentional.The new arguments:
field_options.add_argument("--model-extra-keys", ...) field_options.add_argument("--model-extra-keys-without-x-prefix", ...)have appropriate names, types, and help text for driving model‑level
json_schema_extra. The only slightly surprising bit is that they’re attached tofield_optionsrather thanmodel_options, whereas the docs/CLI metadata treat them as “Model Customization”.This only affects how they’re grouped in
--helpoutput, not behavior. If you prefer them to show up under “Model customization” in the CLI help, consider moving them tomodel_options; otherwise the current setup is functionally fine.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
tests/data/jsonschema/model_extras.jsonis excluded by!tests/data/**/*.jsonand included by none
📒 Files selected for processing (17)
docs/cli-reference/index.mddocs/cli-reference/model-customization.mddocs/cli-reference/quick-reference.mdsrc/datamodel_code_generator/__init__.pysrc/datamodel_code_generator/__main__.pysrc/datamodel_code_generator/arguments.pysrc/datamodel_code_generator/cli_options.pysrc/datamodel_code_generator/model/pydantic_v2/__init__.pysrc/datamodel_code_generator/model/pydantic_v2/base_model.pysrc/datamodel_code_generator/parser/base.pysrc/datamodel_code_generator/parser/graphql.pysrc/datamodel_code_generator/parser/jsonschema.pysrc/datamodel_code_generator/parser/openapi.pysrc/datamodel_code_generator/prompt_data.pytests/data/expected/main/jsonschema/model_extras_v2.pytests/data/expected/main/jsonschema/model_extras_without_x_prefix_v2.pytests/main/jsonschema/test_main_jsonschema.py
🧰 Additional context used
🧬 Code graph analysis (4)
tests/data/expected/main/jsonschema/model_extras_v2.py (3)
src/datamodel_code_generator/model/pydantic_v2/base_model.py (1)
BaseModel(162-348)src/datamodel_code_generator/model/pydantic_v2/__init__.py (1)
ConfigDict(29-55)tests/data/expected/main/jsonschema/model_extras_without_x_prefix_v2.py (1)
ModelExtras(10-14)
tests/main/jsonschema/test_main_jsonschema.py (2)
tests/main/conftest.py (2)
output_file(98-100)run_main_and_assert(244-408)tests/test_main_kr.py (1)
output_file(44-46)
src/datamodel_code_generator/parser/jsonschema.py (1)
src/datamodel_code_generator/model/base.py (1)
path(902-904)
tests/data/expected/main/jsonschema/model_extras_without_x_prefix_v2.py (2)
src/datamodel_code_generator/model/pydantic_v2/base_model.py (1)
BaseModel(162-348)src/datamodel_code_generator/model/pydantic_v2/__init__.py (1)
ConfigDict(29-55)
🪛 Ruff (0.14.10)
src/datamodel_code_generator/__main__.py
503-503: Unused noqa directive (non-enabled: UP045)
Remove unused noqa directive
(RUF100)
504-504: Unused noqa directive (non-enabled: UP045)
Remove unused noqa directive
(RUF100)
src/datamodel_code_generator/model/pydantic_v2/__init__.py
9-9: Unused noqa directive (non-enabled: UP035)
Remove unused noqa directive
(RUF100)
47-47: Unused noqa directive (non-enabled: UP006, UP045)
Remove unused noqa directive
(RUF100)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (11)
- GitHub Check: 3.13 on Windows
- GitHub Check: py312-isort7 on Ubuntu
- GitHub Check: py312-black24 on Ubuntu
- GitHub Check: 3.10 on Windows
- GitHub Check: 3.11 on Windows
- GitHub Check: py312-black22 on Ubuntu
- GitHub Check: 3.14 on Windows
- GitHub Check: 3.11 on Ubuntu
- GitHub Check: 3.10 on macOS
- GitHub Check: 3.12 on Windows
- GitHub Check: benchmarks
🔇 Additional comments (18)
src/datamodel_code_generator/cli_options.py (1)
118-121: New CLI option metadata entries look consistent.
--model-extra-keysand--model-extra-keys-without-x-prefixare correctly added under the MODEL category and match the documented anchors, so they should integrate cleanly with the CLI docs sync tests.docs/cli-reference/model-customization.md (1)
22-23: New--model-extra-keys*documentation is clear and aligned with behavior.The additions to the options table and the new sections for:
--model-extra-keys--model-extra-keys-without-x-prefixare consistent with the generated Pydantic v2 examples and the expected test outputs (including the stripping of the
x-prefix in the without‑x‑prefix variant). The anchor IDs and cross‑links from quick reference all line up.No changes needed from my side.
Also applies to: 3334-3443
tests/data/expected/main/jsonschema/model_extras_without_x_prefix_v2.py (1)
1-14: Expected output matches the documented behavior for--model-extra-keys-without-x-prefix.The generated
ModelExtrasclass correctly uses:model_config = ConfigDict( json_schema_extra={'custom-metadata': {'key1': 'value1'}, 'version': 1}, )which aligns with both the CLI flag semantics and the docs. This is a good regression fixture for the new feature.
docs/cli-reference/quick-reference.md (1)
98-99: Quick reference updates are consistent with the new model extras options.The new entries for
--model-extra-keysand--model-extra-keys-without-x-prefixare correctly:
- Placed under “Model Customization” in the category table.
- Included in the alphabetical index with matching anchors and concise descriptions.
This keeps the quick reference in sync with both the CLI metadata and the detailed model-customization docs.
Also applies to: 249-250
src/datamodel_code_generator/__main__.py (2)
838-839: Config → generate wiring for model extras looks consistent
model_extra_keysandmodel_extra_keys_without_x_prefixare passed through togenerate()alongside the existing field-level options; the plumbing here looks correct.
503-504: Remove unused# noqa: UP045on new config fieldsRuff reports these
noqapragmas as unused; UP045 isn't enabled, so the comments are redundant and can be dropped.Suggested diff
- model_extra_keys: Optional[set[str]] = None # noqa: UP045 - model_extra_keys_without_x_prefix: Optional[set[str]] = None # noqa: UP045 + model_extra_keys: Optional[set[str]] = None + model_extra_keys_without_x_prefix: Optional[set[str]] = None⛔ Skipped due to learnings
Learnt from: koxudaxi Repo: koxudaxi/datamodel-code-generator PR: 2799 File: src/datamodel_code_generator/model/pydantic/__init__.py:43-43 Timestamp: 2025-12-25T09:22:14.661Z Learning: In datamodel-code-generator project, defensive `# noqa: PLC0415` directives should be kept on lazy imports (imports inside functions/methods) even when Ruff reports them as unused via RUF100, to prepare for potential future Ruff configuration changes that might enable the import-outside-top-level rule.Learnt from: koxudaxi Repo: koxudaxi/datamodel-code-generator PR: 2681 File: tests/cli_doc/test_cli_doc_coverage.py:82-82 Timestamp: 2025-12-18T13:43:16.235Z Learning: In datamodel-code-generator project, Ruff preview mode is enabled via `lint.preview = true` in pyproject.toml. This enables preview rules like PLR6301 (no-self-use), so `noqa: PLR6301` directives are necessary and should not be removed even if RUF100 suggests they are unused.src/datamodel_code_generator/prompt_data.py (1)
66-67: New prompt descriptions for model-level extras are consistentThe added descriptions for
--model-extra-keysand--model-extra-keys-without-x-prefixaccurately reflect the behavior and align with the rest of OPTION_DESCRIPTIONS.tests/data/expected/main/jsonschema/model_extras_v2.py (1)
1-14: Expected Pydantic v2 output for model-level extras looks correctThe generated model correctly places the
x-custom-metadatapayload underConfigDict(json_schema_extra=...), matching the intended model-level extras behavior.src/datamodel_code_generator/parser/openapi.py (1)
242-243: OpenAPIParser correctly exposes and forwards model-level extras configurationThe new
model_extra_keysandmodel_extra_keys_without_x_prefixparameters are typed and defaulted consistently with the field-level options and are correctly forwarded to the baseJsonSchemaParser/Parservia keyword arguments.Also applies to: 359-360
docs/cli-reference/index.md (1)
14-14: CLI index updates align with new model extras optionsThe Model Customization count and the “M” section now include
--model-extra-keysand--model-extra-keys-without-x-prefix, with--module-split-modecorrectly grouped there; the index remains alphabetically ordered and consistent with the new feature.Also applies to: 116-118
src/datamodel_code_generator/parser/base.py (1)
738-740: Parser now cleanly supports model-level extras configurationAdding
model_extra_keysandmodel_extra_keys_without_x_prefixto the constructor and storing them as sets mirrors the existing field-level options and provides a consistent configuration surface for downstream parsers.Also applies to: 856-857
tests/main/jsonschema/test_main_jsonschema.py (2)
6371-6406: Model-level extras test wiring looks solidThe parametrization, CLI doc metadata, and
run_main_and_assertcall fortest_main_jsonschema_model_extrasare consistent with existing field‑extras tests and match the new--model-extra-keysflag semantics. Limiting coverage topydantic_v2.BaseModelaligns with the Pydantic v2–only feature surface.
6410-6447: Good coverage for prefix-stripping behavior
test_main_jsonschema_model_extras_without_x_prefixcorrectly exercises the--model-extra-keys-without-x-prefixoption with multiple keys and validates the dedicated golden output. The CLI doc marker andmodel_outputsmapping also follow the established pattern used for field-level extras.src/datamodel_code_generator/parser/graphql.py (1)
160-162: New model_extra_keys parameters are correctly threaded throughThe added
model_extra_keysandmodel_extra_keys_without_x_prefixkwargs are typed, defaulted, and forwarded toParser.__init__consistently with existing field extras, so GraphQLParser stays API‑compatible with the core parser configuration.Also applies to: 275-276
src/datamodel_code_generator/__init__.py (2)
436-437: LGTM!The new parameters follow the established pattern of
field_extra_keysandfield_extra_keys_without_x_prefix, maintaining API consistency.
726-727: LGTM!The new parameters are correctly passed to the parser, consistent with how field-level extra keys are handled.
src/datamodel_code_generator/parser/jsonschema.py (2)
593-594: LGTM!The new parameters follow the established pattern of field-level extra keys.
707-708: LGTM!Correct propagation to the base parser.
CodSpeed Performance ReportMerging #2803 will not alter performanceComparing Summary
Footnotes
|
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2803 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 99.51% 99.51%
=======================================
Files 89 89
Lines 13715 13745 +30
Branches 1613 1619 +6
=======================================
+ Hits 13648 13678 +30
Misses 36 36
Partials 31 31
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
koxudaxi
force-pushed
the
feature/model-extra-keys-json-schema-extra
branch
from
cab6435 to
a0932cd
Compare
Breaking Change AnalysisResult: No breaking changes detected Reasoning: This PR adds two new opt-in CLI options (--model-extra-keys and --model-extra-keys-without-x-prefix) and corresponding Python API parameters for adding model-level schema extensions to Pydantic v2's ConfigDict json_schema_extra. All changes are purely additive: new parameters default to None, existing behavior is unchanged when the new flags aren't used, and custom templates continue to work since the new model_extras data is handled internally. There are no changes to default behavior, no removal of existing functionality, and no modifications that would affect existing users' generated code. This analysis was performed by Claude Code Action |
1 participant
Fixes: #2129
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Documentation
Tests
✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.