marshmallow-code/marshmallow

Allow specifying output field when using `unknown=INCLUDE`

Open

#853 opened on Jun 23, 2018

View on GitHubContributor guide
 (3 comments) (4 reactions) (0 assignees)Python (640 forks)batch import
feedback welcomehelp wanted

Repository metrics

Stars
 (6,787 stars)
PR merge metrics
 (Avg merge 10h 55m) (7 merged PRs in 30d)

Description

From https://github.com/marshmallow-code/marshmallow/issues/524#issuecomment-393057138

We could even go further and let the user set a default Field when using INCLUDE, but I'm not sure it is so useful, and it is never too late to add it in a later step.

(edited to make the argument name correct)

I suggested here that a field could be passed to unknown, e.g. unknown=fields.Str().

Contributor guide

Research direction
Investigate how to modify the serialization logic to accept a field parameter when `unknown=INCLUDE` is set. Look at the current handling of unknown fields and propose a way to pass a field instance for serialization of unknown fields.
Tech stack
python
Domain
backend
Issue type
Feature
DifficultyEstimated implementation difficulty for a new contributor, from 1 for very small changes to 5 for expert-level work.
2
Estimated timeA rough time range for an experienced contributor to investigate, implement, test, and prepare a pull request.
1-3 hours
Activity statusHow available the issue appears right now: fresh, active, stale, blocked, or waiting on maintainer input.
Fresh
ClarityHow clearly the issue explains the expected change, acceptance criteria, and next step.
Clear
Prerequisites
Pythonmarshmallow
Newbie friendlinessA 1-100 score estimating how approachable this issue is for first-time contributors.
70