-
SummaryI use validator to validate my every request struct, such as pub async fn create(Json(payload): Json<CreateUserRequest>) -> Json<CreateUserResponse> {
//payload.validate() and some logic on validate result
}
pub async fn update(Json(payload): Json<UpdateUserRequest>) -> Json<UpdateUserResponse> {
//payload.validate() and some logic on validate result
}I don't want to do so everytime after adding new handler, so I wonder whether there is a way to do this all in one extractor with Generics, such as : pub struct Validated(pub Json)? and the handler looks like pub async fn update(Validated(Json(payload)): Validated<Json<UpdateUserRequest>>) -> Json<UpdateUserResponse> {}Thanks everyone, appreciate you all. axum version0.7.5 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 1 comment 8 replies
-
|
Did you try impl<T> FromRequest for Validated<T> {
// ...
}and implementing the required method? Was there some issue with it? I'm not sure though if an impl like that would actually help you since you can't have different validations for different payloads that way and thus you can check just common things (e.g. common fields are present). So you might actually want to do something like impl FromRequest for Validated<CreateUserRequest> {
// ...
}
impl FromRequest for Validated<UpdateUserRequest> {
// ...
} |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Yes, I had try as your way. impl FromRequest for Validated<CreateUserRequest> {
// ...
}
impl FromRequest for Validated<UpdateUserRequest> {
// ...
}In my opinion, it would be nice to support something like this, pub fn async create(Validated(Json(payload)): Validated<Json<CreateRequest>>) {}
//the only thing need to be satisfied is: SomeType derive Deserialize
pub fn async xxx(Validated(Json(payload)): Validated<Json<SomeType>>) {} |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
That looks like it would have about the same amount of boilerplate to me. You would have to create a method per struct that you wanted to validate. Which you're going to have to do anyway if the validation differs between structs, right? Maybe I don't understand entirely what you're trying to achieve, can you try providing a more complete example of how the usage should look like? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
maybe something like this impl IntoResponse for RequestValidateErrors {
//some implements
}
#[derive(Debug, Serialize, Deserialize)]
pub struct Validated<T>(pub T);
impl<S, B, T> FromRequest<B> for Validated<T>
where
B: Send + 'static,
T: DeserializeOwned + Debug + Validate + FromRequest<S, B>,
S: Send + Sync,
{
type Rejection = RequestValidateErrors;
async fn from_request(req: Request<Body>, state: &S) -> Result<Self, Self::Rejection> {
let bytes = axum::body::to_bytes(req.into_body(), 100000).await.unwrap();
let value = serde_json::from_slice::<T>(&bytes).unwrap();
validate_res = value.validate();
//process validate result, and if errors happened return RequestValidateErrors
Ok(Validated(value))
}
}After that, all the error about Request extrators are deal in Validated #[derive(Deserialize, Serialize, Validate, Debug)]
pub struct RegisterRequest {
#[validate(length(min=6, max=16, code="1001", message="the length of username must be between 6 and 16"))]
pub username: String,
}
pub async fn register(Validated(payload): Validated<RegisterRequest>) -> Result<GeneralResponse<RegisterResponse>, AppError> {
//here, don't need to care about request validation
}Really appreciate, thank you |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@zishon I wanted to suggest something like what you wrote in your last comment, probably call it |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
For some more prior art, you can also look into axum-garde, which integrates the |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Yes, exactly as you said. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Okay, I marked your comment as answering the question. I think you could have also done that yourself, by the way. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
maybe something like this