🐛 Fix extensions type on HTTPScope and WebsocketScope #271
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
|
Extensions is optional, so this seems correct. I'll land it provided the checks pass! |
|
Great, thanks for this! |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
@andrewgodwin We are annotating
uvicornwithasgirefnow, and possibly extending this idea toStarlette. So... Thanks for maintaining it! :)While I was annotating
uvicorn, I've noticed thatmypycomplains about the nonexistence of "extensions" so I added it. But after looking at the ASGI specs, it doesn't look like "extensions" is mandatory. Am I wrong?As per #221 it was decided to use
Optionalto optional fields, instead of making the field optional per se, so I've created this PR.