[management] Code generation: update services and models#881
[management] Code generation: update services and models#881AdyenAutomationBot wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello @AdyenAutomationBot, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request delivers an automated update to the Highlights
🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console. Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request introduces several new auto-generated model classes and updates existing ones, likely from an updated OpenAPI specification. The changes are consistent with code generation patterns. I've found one issue in the newly added toArray() method in the generated models, which doesn't correctly use the property attribute map for serialization, potentially leading to incorrect array keys. A fix has been suggested. Otherwise, the generated code looks fine.
| public function toArray(): array | ||
| { | ||
| $array = []; | ||
| foreach (self::$openAPITypes as $propertyName => $propertyType) { | ||
| $propertyValue = $this[$propertyName]; | ||
| if ($propertyValue !== null) { | ||
| // Check if the property value is an object and has a toArray() method | ||
| if (is_object($propertyValue) && method_exists($propertyValue, 'toArray')) { | ||
| $array[$propertyName] = $propertyValue->toArray(); | ||
| // Check if it's type datetime | ||
| } elseif ($propertyValue instanceof \DateTime) { | ||
| $array[$propertyName] = $propertyValue->format(DATE_ATOM); | ||
| // If it's an array type we should check whether it contains objects and if so call toArray method | ||
| } elseif (is_array($propertyValue)) { | ||
| $array[$propertyName] = array_map(function ($item) { | ||
| return $item instanceof ModelInterface ? $item->toArray() : $item; | ||
| }, $propertyValue); | ||
| } else { | ||
| // Otherwise, directly assign the property value to the array | ||
| $array[$propertyName] = $propertyValue; | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| return $array; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The toArray() method does not use the attributeMap to map property names to their original names as defined in the OpenAPI specification. This can result in an array with incorrect keys. For example, a property named myProperty in PHP might be my_property in the JSON/array. The jsonSerialize() method correctly handles this by using ObjectSerializer, but toArray() does not.
Since this is auto-generated code, this bug is likely present in other models as well and should be fixed in the generator template.
public function toArray(): array
{
$array = [];
foreach (self::$openAPITypes as $propertyName => $propertyType) {
$propertyValue = $this[$propertyName];
if ($propertyValue !== null) {
$originalPropertyName = self::$attributeMap[$propertyName];
// Check if the property value is an object and has a toArray() method
if (is_object($propertyValue) && method_exists($propertyValue, 'toArray')) {
$array[$originalPropertyName] = $propertyValue->toArray();
// Check if it's type datetime
} elseif ($propertyValue instanceof \DateTime) {
$array[$originalPropertyName] = $propertyValue->format(DATE_ATOM);
// If it's an array type we should check whether it contains objects and if so call toArray method
} elseif (is_array($propertyValue)) {
$array[$originalPropertyName] = array_map(function ($item) {
return $item instanceof ModelInterface ? $item->toArray() : $item;
}, $propertyValue);
} else {
// Otherwise, directly assign the property value to the array
$array[$originalPropertyName] = $propertyValue;
}
}
}
return $array;
}
AdyenAutomationBot
force-pushed
the
sdk-automation/management
branch
from
ed7e268 to
4826fa3
Compare
AdyenAutomationBot
force-pushed
the
sdk-automation/management
branch
from
4826fa3 to
4e108b6
Compare
|
1 participant
This PR contains the automated changes for the
managementservice.The commit history of this PR reflects the
adyen-openapicommits that have been applied.